The Evolution 

nr n^ur 


OF THE 


AS A PROOF OF 


Design in Creation 


PIIIN 





I 


I 



Gcpight'N 0 _ 

COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT 



















* 







> 











' 





; * 


•/ 




* 

















































THE EVOLUTION 


OF 

THE ATMOSPHERE 

AS A PROOF OF 

DESIGN AND PURPOSE IN THE CREATION 

AND OF 

THE EXISTENCE OF A PERSONAL GOD 


A Simple and Rigorously Scientific Reply to Modern 
Materialistic Atheism. 


BY JOHN PHIN 

Author of “How to Use the Microscope” ; “The Seven Follies of Science” ; 
“The Shakespeare Cyclopaedia,” etc., etc. 


NEW YORK. 

THE INDUSTRIAL PUBLICATION COMPANY, 
i 9 o S 






dttSARy of oonsress^ 

j iWu COOiftS 

i oci 19 i«oa | 

* 7 

$> i‘*'u> 


0<£.<L\8V* 

Q_ AAfe ? 

I 


Copyright, 1908 by John Phin 


ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 


September, 1908. 





To 


HON. EUGENE STEVENSON 

my beloved opponent in many 
Intellectual Battles 

in which our conclusions usually agreed though our 
methods of reaching them may have been 
radically different 
This little book is inscribed 
As a Token of Affectionate Regard by 


THE AUTHOR 











PREFACE. 

Those who have carefully followed the trend of thought 
amongst the more intelligent portion of our business men 
and mechanics during the past ten or fifteen years, are 
aware of the fact that the dogmas of atheistic material¬ 
ism are yeaidy obtaining greater and greater acceptance 
with persons of that class. This is due largely to the 
increased energy and persistence with which these dog¬ 
mas have of late been promulgated. In Great Britain 
the opponents of all theistic belief have established a 
Society for the express purpose of overthrowing the 
Christian religion, and it is chiefly owing to their efforts 
that nearly 150,000 copies of the English translation of 
Haeckel’s Biddle of the Universe have been sold in Eu¬ 
rope. This book, of which the market price in this coun¬ 
try is $1.50, is to be found on every railway stall in 
Great Britain, clearly printed and substantially bound 
in cloth for 24 cents (one shilling), and for twelve cents 
in paper binding, a price which seems to be very little 


VI 


PREFACE. 


more than the cost of manufacture, the Society evi¬ 
dently contributing largely to the expense of distribu¬ 
tion. In addition to this, courses of lectures have been 
organized by the same Society, and every effort is made 
to propagate the belief that there is no God. 

In referring to Haeckel’s work I have, in justice to 
the author, used the latest English edition which has 
been issued under the author’s sanction and which has 
also been slightly modified in some parts, but this cannot 
cause any inconvenience to those who have access only 
to the American reprint. 

At the same time it may be proper to add that the 
present volume is not intended to be, in any sense, a re¬ 
ply to Haeckel’s work. It takes up an entirely differ¬ 
ent line of argument and the references to Haeckel are 
merely incidental. 

The great contest which is at present waged between 
Christian theists and materialistic atheists—a contest 
over the fundamental principles of all religion, since it 
relates to the affirmation or denial of the very existence 
of God—unquestionably turns upon the presence or ab¬ 
sence of design in creation. Haeckel, whose words I 
have quoted on an early page, denies that there is any 


PREFACE. 


vii 

evidence of design and attributes everything to what he 
calls “blind chance.” It follows, as a matter of course 
that he and his followers take the very logical position: 
‘‘No design, no designer; therefore, no God.” And as 
such men as Professor Seth of Edinburgh University and 
others take the ground (unwarrantably, perhaps) that 
modern scientific discoveries and especially the doctrine 
of evolution, destroy the force of such arguments as those 
used by Paley and the Bridgewater men, the author of 
the present volume has attempted to prove by a new and, 
as he thinks, a stronger argument than any that has ever 
before been presented, that this earth was created as the 
result of intelligent design and consequently by a self- 
conscious and intelligent Designer. 

For the purpose of distinctly indicating the argument 
of this book, it may be conceded that the theory of evo¬ 
lution, as applied to the organic world, has swept away 
the whole logical fabric constructed by Paley and his 
followers; that no direct indication of design can now 
be found in any of the marvelous adaptations of animal 
and vegetable life to the conditions in which such life 
exists; that chance, “blind chance” with its millions of 
experiments in all directions, can, under the law of nat- 


PREFACE. 


viii 

nral selection, account for all the forms of life in the 
world, including the body and the mind of man. 

What this little book endeavors to show is that the 
proof of design in certain adaptations and necessary 
conditions, exhibited in the inorganic world —in the at¬ 
mosphere which is essential to all the higher forms of 
life—is absolute and stands unaffected by any theory 
of evolution. There can be no struggle for existence be¬ 
tween oxygen and nitrogen; no instance of the survival 
of the fittest can be pointed out among the different ele¬ 
ments which compose the life-giving, life-supporting air. 
There has been no long series of experiments and no com¬ 
petition, among innumerable atmospheres to determine 
which should envelop the earth and establish conditions 
essential to the evolution of human life. The laws of 
natural selection may account for a Lord Kelvin, but 
these laws could have come into action only after some 
amazingly powerful and cunning chemist had, with a 
precision and minute adjustment of proportions almost 
beyond conception, selected and set apart such an as¬ 
sortment of ingredients as would ultimately produce an 
atmosphere in which it might be possible for a Lord Kel¬ 
vin to be evolved. 


PREFACE. 


IX 


A very simple calculation which is easily within the 
comprehension of any bright grammar-school graduate, 
shows clearly that the proportions of the essential in¬ 
gredients which compose this earth and its atmosphere 
must have been adjusted to the one-ten-millionth part 
of the materials employed and that a variation to the 
extent of one-five-millionth part on either side of a cer¬ 
tain very definite quantity, would have rendered all life, 
as we know it, utterly impossible. Such a nice adjust¬ 
ment as this could never have been brought about either 
by chance or by the operation of any known physical or 
chemical laws. 

It is for the presentation of this argument in a sim¬ 
ple and easily intelligible form that this little volume 
has been written, and as many of those to whom it is 
addressed are not familiar with the scientific facts upon 
which the argument is based, I have endeavored to pre¬ 
sent these in as simple and as popular a manner as pos¬ 
sible. In the effort to accomplish this I may at times 
have been guilty of what readers of more advanced edu¬ 
cation may call needless repetition, and for this I must 
beg their leniency. Readers who are familiar with the 
leading facts and principles of physical science may pass 


X 


PREFACE. 


over the early sections and by perusing the concluding 
portion beginning with section 13, entitled the “Evolu¬ 
tion of the Atmosphere” obtain a complete comprehen¬ 
sion of the entire argument which it is the object of this 
little volume to present. 

For obvious reasons the old chemical nomenclature, 
the British and American standards of weights and meas¬ 
ures, and the Fahrenheit scale for temperatures, are so 
far as possible employed. To the average non-scientific 
reader the terms “carbon dioxide”, “26 centimeters” 
and “80 degrees centigrade” convey no clearly defined 
ideas, while the signification of the corresponding terms, 
“carbonic acid”, “10 inches” and “144 deg. Fahrenheit” 
is readily and accurately comprehended. And in other 
respects I have endeavored to use the simplest language 
that was consistent with accuracy for in this connection 
I have no hesitation in expressing the opinion that a 
great deal of the popular effect produced by much of 
the current atheistic literature is due to the use of high 
sounding terms which the. ordinary reader does not fully 
understand, but which he accepts as the expression of 
opinions which he thinks must be infallible because they 


PREFACE. 


xi 


are clothed in what he regards as “scientific” and there¬ 
fore necessarily accurate language. 

Of one thing, however, I think, the reader may rest 
assured: Science has not yet enabled us to solve the rid¬ 
dle of the universe, and, further, there is no immediate 
prospect of its doing so. This little book certainly does 
not claim to solve that problem which for us is the great¬ 
est of all—the destiny of man. But it is very certain 
that if there is no God then all hope of immortality and 
of anything beyond the grave, vanishes like the morning 
mist. 

I cannot help thinking, however, that I have here of¬ 
fered irrefragable proof that there is a God—a Supreme 
self-conscious, intelligent and omnipotent Being, and 
therefore I send forth this little volume ip the hope that 
it may strengthen the faith of some and give to all new 
views of what the founder of the Bridgewater Treatises 
selected for their subject-matter, viz: “The Power, Wis¬ 
dom and Goodness of God, as manifested in the Cre¬ 
ation.” 

JOHN PHIN. 

Paterson, N. J., Nov. 1907. 



CONTENTS 


The Bearing of the Theory of Evolution upon Religious 

Belief . 15 

The Personality of God. 19 

Anthropomorphism . 24 

Pantheism . 33 

Adaptation as Evidence of Intelligent Design. 35 

“Natural Law”—“The Reign of Law”. 43 

Creation by Law as Distinguished from Creation by Fiat. . 4 9 

Evolution . 55 

The Natural Philosophy of the Atmosphere. 63 

The Composition of the Atmosphere and the Properties 

of the Several Components. 74 

Table of the Composition of Air. 76 

Nitrogen . 78 

Oxygen . 81 

Aqueous Vapor . 86 

Carbonic Acid . 90 

Ozone . 96 

Ammonia and Nitric Acid . 98 

Is the Atmosphere a Mere Mixture of the Components 
which form it or are these United in Chemical Com¬ 
bination? . 98 

The Diffusion of Gases.106 

The Evolution of the Atmosphere.116 






















XIV 


CONTEXTS 


The Adaptation of the Atmosphere to Plant and Animal 

Life .130 

How Were These Adjustments Brought About.145 

Automatic Mechanical Adaptation.140 

Chance . 155 

Accident .163 

Coincidence .166 

Complex Combinations .160 

Intelligent Design .176 

Conclusion . ..179 











The Evolution of the Atmosphere 


AS A PROOF OF 

DESIGN IN CREATION. 


§ 1. The Bearing of the Theory of Evolution 
upon Religious Belief. 

That system which is known as the evolutionary 
theory of the development of the universe, is now ob¬ 
taining very general acceptance amongst the ablest and 
most highly cultivated minds of our time, but unfor¬ 
tunately it happens that from this theory some have 
unwarrantably drawn conclusions which are not only 
antagonistic to Christianity but subversive of the fun-* 
damental fact or principle upon which all true religion 
is based. Prominent amongst these views is the dogma 
that the modem theory of evolution, or, as some phrase 
it, the mechanical theory not only of inorganic develop¬ 
ment but of life itself and of all those wonderful adap¬ 
tations which are such striking features of animal and 
vegetable organisms, leaves no place for a supreme ere- 




16 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

ative and guiding intelligence and proves that all pro¬ 
gress from the primeval nebula, or ‘‘fire-mist,” as some 
call it, through celestial, geological and biological 
changes, is due to what they themselves call “blind 
chance. ” 

Professor Ernest Haeckel, who at the present day is 
the foremost advocate of avowed atheistic materialism, 
thus states this position in one of his latest works— 
The Biddle of the Universe : “Since impartial study 
of the evolution of the world teaches us that there is 
no definite aim and no special purpose to be traced in 
it, there seems to be no alternative but to leave every¬ 
thing to ‘blind chance.’ * * * The development of 

the universe is a monistic mechanical process, in which 
we discover no aim or purpose whatever; what we call 
design in the organic world is a special result of bio¬ 
logical agencies; neither in the evolution of the heaven¬ 
ly bodies nor in that of the crust of the earth do we 
find any trace of a controlling purpose—all is the result 
of chance.” The Biddle of the Universe. Latest 
English Edition Page 97. 

The unprejudiced reader must see that several of the 
statements which are made and reiterated in this passage 
are mere unwarranted assumptions and moreover it is 
well known that the conclusions to which it is claimed 
that they lead, are not accepted by those who are regard¬ 
ed as the highest authorities in science, amongst whom 
are included those who are or have been the most ar- 


of Design in the Creation. 17 

dent advocates of the development hypothesis—such 
men, for example, as Asa Gray, Sir Richard Owen, 
Lord Kelvin, Sir Oliver Lodge and even Darwin him¬ 
self. But the flood of atheistic literature which has 
lately issued from what may not unjustly be called the 
pseudo-scientific press, seems to have exerted a very 
powerful influence upon the minds of many of our 
young people, while the mere quantity of this litera¬ 
ture and the persistence with which its teachings have 
been urged, have conveyed a false impression as to the 
unanimity of scientific men upon the subject. As a 
matter of fact it will be found that it is only the second- 
rate minds in scientific circles that have adopted these 
atheistic views. Biologists quite as able as Haeckel and 
quite as impartial and even more so, because uninflu¬ 
enced by that intensely bitter hatred of ecclesiasticism 
which is confessedly one of Haeckel’s most prominent 
characteristics, see clear evidences of far-seeing design 
in the structure of plants and animals and find in evolu¬ 
tion no antagonism to the doctrine that this universe 
as it stands, in all its ramifications, is the outcome of 
divine guidance and controlling purpose. Thus Pro¬ 
fessor Owen, who was unquestionably the highest bio¬ 
logical authority of his day, and whose investigations 
and opinions have certainly not been superseded by 
later discoveries, however great may have been the 
recent additions to our knowledge in some directions, 
saw nothing in evolution that can militate against in- 


18 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

telligent design. His words, as quoted by Mivart in 
“The Genesis of Species” are: 

“Natural evolution by means of slow physical and 
organic operations through long ages is not the less 
clearly recognizable as the act of all-adaptive mind, 
because we have abandoned the old error of supposing 
it to be the result of a primary, direct and sudden act 
of creational construction. * * * The succession 

of species by continuously operating law is not neces¬ 
sarily a ‘blind operation.’ Such law, however dis¬ 
cerned in the properties of natural objects, intimates, 
nevertheless, a preconceived progress. Organisms may 
be evolved in orderly manner, stage after stage, to¬ 
wards a foreseen goal, and the hroad features of the 
course may still show the unmistakeable impress of 
divine volition.” 

It is conceded, I think, both by Christians and athe¬ 
ists that the argument for a personal God stands or 
falls with the argument for design. This point is 
strongly emphasized by the translator of The Riddle 
of the Universe in the following words: 

“The real difference of opinion between Haeckel and 
those scientific men who adopt a theistic view is on this 
point: Did the underlying Cause of all things exer¬ 
cise a conscious control over evolution from the first? 
Was there mind and purpose in the ‘Infinite and Eter¬ 
nal Energy’ (which everybody admits as such) from the 
beginning? The Riddle of the Universe , p. xiv. 


of Design in the Creation. 


9 


The answer which he gives is distinctly and .emphati¬ 
cally negative and from this he draws the very obvious 
conclusion that if there is no design there can he no 
evidence of the existence of a God. 

But on the other hand it must be equally obvious that 
if we find strong and unmistakeable evidence of intelli¬ 
gent and controlling design in the earliest stages of the 
development of this planet, that evidence applies with 
equal force to the existence of a designer, or, in other 
words, to the existence of a personal God. Not the mere 
deification of blind, unconscious physical matter and 
energy but a self-conscious, supreme intelligence or mind 
which exercised a controlling purpose; and the existence 
of such “mind and purpose” is, we think, shown clearly 
and unquestionably by the selection and arrangement of 
the materials which went to produce this earth and the 
atmosphere which envelopes it. 


§ 2. The Personality of God. 

Belief in the personality of God and consequently in 
the existence of a supreme guiding Intelligence, is the 
foundation of all true religion. Sueh religions as those 
of Haeckel, Comte, and men of that class are really no 
religious at all; they are mere makeshifts and the name 


20 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


“religion’’ is applied to them by their originators only 
because of an innate, though perhaps unacknowledged 
belief in the fact that a religion of some kind is a neces¬ 
sity to human nature, or rather it is a part of it, for or¬ 
dinary men and women can no more exist without a re¬ 
ligion of some kind than they can exist without food. 
Man can exist for a short time without food, but to do so 
involves a constant and arduous struggle, and it is the 
same with religion. Man can try to get along without 
religion—without something to adore, without some su¬ 
perior power to which he can appeal, but to exist thus 
demands a constant fight against his nature, and even 
if he should bring himself to deny the existence of any 
personal God, he would be compelled to turn to some 
abstraction and to worship that. This was the case with 
Comte who, after rejecting all belief in God, built up a 
philosophical religion of the most grotesque kind and 
insisted upon his followers devoting at least two hours 
each day to so-called religious observances in which, as 
John Stuart Mill tells us in his work, Comte and Posi¬ 
tivism, “Private adoration is to be addressed to Collec¬ 
tive Humanity in the persons of worthy individual repre¬ 
sentatives, who may be either living or dead, but must 
in all cases be women; for women, being the sexe ai- 
mante, represent the best attribute of humanity, that 
which ought to regulate all human life, nor can humanity 
possibly be symbolized in any form but that of a woman. 


of Design in the Creation. 


21 


The objects of private adoration are the mother, the wife 
and the daughter, representing severally the past, the 
present and the future, and calling into active exercise 
the three social sentiments—veneration, attachment and 
kindness. We are to regard them, whether dead or alive, 
as our guardian angels, (les vrais anges guardiens). If 
the last two have never existed; or if, in the particular 
case, any of the three types is too faulty for the office 
assigned it,—their place may be supplied by some other 
type of womanly excellence, even by one merely histor¬ 
ical.’ ’ 

And this was the religion that was to take the place of 
Christianity! 

And more recently we find Haeckel urging the wor¬ 
ship of the three abstractions—The True, The Beautiful 
and The Good—a strange trinity whose attempted em¬ 
bodiment in the things and doings of actual life would 
certainly give rise to more sectarianism than any religion 
of the present day. For while Truth, Beauty and Good¬ 
ness are most admirable qualities, it must be evident to 
even the least logical mind that since they are mere ab¬ 
stractions, having no existence apart from the things in 
which they inhere, there can never be between them and a 
being having the attributes, motives and affections which 
characterize humanity, any personal relation more close 
than that between the human mind and a dry mathemati¬ 
cal proposition, and man, in all ages, has needed some- 


22 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


thing more than that. Such suggestions remind one of the 
proposition made by Richelieu to Louis XIII in Bulwer 
Lytton’s play entitled Richelieu , when the King asked 
his minister to leave him “one thing to love”. “If you 
must love something, Sire, love me.” Even the King 
had to laugh at such a suggestion—the offer of a feeble 
old man as ‘ ‘ proxy for a young fresh Demoiselle ! 9 ’ And 
that is just the kind of exchange these men offer—a 
dried, withered scrap of philosophy for the Fatherhood 
of the living God! 

Even Lucretius, who was a professed atheist and the 
avowed object of whose famous poem, Be Rerum Natura, 
was to free the human spirit from the cramping bonds 
of superstition, to destroy belief in the gods, and to do 
away with the dread of a future life and the fear of any¬ 
thing that could happen after death, begins with an in¬ 
vocation to the “alma Venus” to whom he addressed a 
prayer! He ought to have seen that the terms in which 
he addresses the goddess and beseeches her to ‘ ‘ bestow on 
his words an immortal charm,” nullifies his profession 
of atheism. 

The historian, Thiers, in reflecting upon the events 
which followed the resolution taken by Napoleon, a reso¬ 
lution which led to negotiations with the Pope and the 
setting up of the Catholic worship, results which called 
forth such an outburst of general enthusiasm on the part 
of the nation as showed how deeply planted and how 


of Design in the Creation. 23 

strong is the religious feeling in the human heart, says: 

Whether true or false, sublime or ridiculous, man must 
have a religion. Everywhere, in all ages and in all coun¬ 
tries, in ancient as in modern times, in civilized as well 
as in barbarian nations, we find him a worshipper at 
some altar, be it venerable, degraded or blood-stained.” 

The great difficulty which the ordinary mind finds 
in accepting the doctrine of the personality of God arises 
from our inability to conceive of any mode of personal, 
self-conscious existence except that which is crudely an¬ 
thropomorphic and which, on analysis, reason therefore 
compels us to reject. Even poets, painters and sculp¬ 
tors with all their power of imagination have never been 
able to present a comprehensive idea of spiritual exist¬ 
ence without human form and limitations. The proph¬ 
ets of old, ‘men who meditated deeply upon these things, 
fully realized this difficulty so that with them even the 
name of God was surrounded with mystery, that is to say, 
it indicated something of which neither they nor their 
hearers could form any definite conception. To such an 
extent was this feeling carried in some of the ancient re¬ 
ligions that it was held as a cardinal point of faith that 
no human lips should even attempt to utter the name of 
God, and the very name itself was held as a sacred mys¬ 
tery only to be revealed in writing to a select few. 

When the prophet prayed that he might see the face 
of God, he was told that no man could see his face and 


24 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


live; in other words, that to attempt to form an adequate 
conception of God would call for such an intellectual ef¬ 
fort as would crush the mind and destroy the vitality of 
the human frame. He was, however, allowed to see the 
“back parts” of the Almighty, or, in other words, he 
was so far inspired that he was able to form a faint con¬ 
ception of God’s mode of action if not of the mode of 
his existence. It is not surprising, therefore, that in at¬ 
tempting to attain clear ideas in regard to the personality 
of God we run the risk of either striking upon the rocks 
of anthropomorphism on the one hand, or of falling 
into the whirlpool of pantheism on the other. As some 
of the readers of this book may not have a clear idea of 
the meaning and force of these terms it may not be out 
of place to give a few words of explanation. 


§ 3. Anthropomorphism. 

Anthropomorphism means, literally,. after the form of 
a man, and in its crudest form this is the idea which the 
child has of God, and it is probably the only idea which 
the childish mind is capable of forming on the subject. 
The children in our Sunday Schools think of God as of 
an immense being in the form of a man, seated upon a 
great white throne and surrounded by angels standing 


of Design in the Creation. 


25 


upon a golden floor, striking their harps, blowing their 
trumpets and bending in adoration before him. And 
they are perfectly excusable for entertaining such ideas 
for the pictures which they see and the so-called sacred 
poetry which they read all tend to foster such views, 
while the idea of a spirit—a supreme Intelligence, in¬ 
finite, eternal, unchangeable and omnipotent—is some¬ 
thing which is entirely beyond the scope of their intel¬ 
lects. And indeed, to tell the truth, it is apparently be¬ 
yond the scope even of many seemingly mature minds; 
even the ablest of us cannot “by searching find out 
God”; we can form no clear and presumably accurate 
idea of His mode of existence, but we may be certain 
that, as a matter of fact, the child’s idea is not the true 
one although it may be accepted in a certain sense as 
symbolical. But the child’s idea serves the child’s pur¬ 
pose for it gives it a notion of a distinct personality 
which may be addressed as “Our Father” and whether 
the child’s idea of that Father takes the concrete form 
of a colossal man, or of an all-pervading spirit, omni¬ 
present, omniscient and self-conscious, is for the present 
at least, practically a matter of very little consequence. 
Surely, however, it is no argument against the existence 
of God that we cannot form a full conception of His 
being and attributes. And yet an author who has at¬ 
tained considerable popularity with a certain class of 
the reading public, being a pleasant though somewhat 


2 6 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


inaccurate writer about bees, flowers and other country 
matters, deliberately offers this as a reason for denying 
the existence of God! He says: ‘ ‘ When I look up at 

the starry heavens at night and reflect upon what it is 
that I really see there, I am constrained to say, ‘ There is 
no God.’ ” The Light of Day, by John Burroughs, p. 164. 

How different is this from the statement of one 
who confessedly stands in the very front rank of the 
scientific men of our time, Lord Kelvin; he says: 
“Science positively affirms Creative Power. It is not 
in dead matter that we live and move and have our being, 
but in the creating and directing Power which science 
compels us to accept as an article of belief.” 

The reason given by Mr. Burroughs for his disbelief in 
God is that “The mind staggers in its attempt to grasp 
the idea of a being that could do that. It is futile to at¬ 
tempt it.” 

Very likely; this merely confirms what Sir Humphrey 
Davy, the great chemist, tells us in his ‘‘Salmonia:” “In 
my opinion, profound minds are the most likely to think 
lightly of the resources of human reason; it is the pert, 
superficial thinker who is generally stronger in every 
kind of unbelief. ’ ’ 

Because Mr. Burroughs feels himself unable to form a 
conception of a Being who could create and guide the 
universe, he therefore jumps to the very illogical con¬ 
clusion that there cannot be any such Being! In other 


of Design in the Creation. 


27 


words, Mr. Borroughs claims that his intellect is the 
measure of the extent and of the possibilities of exis¬ 
tence ! 

Modesty is evidently not one of the mental character¬ 
istics of Mr. Burroughs. 

There are many things which cause the human mind 
to “stagger” when it makes an attempt to grasp them. 
Mr. Burroughs has named one of enormous magnitude, 
a magnitude so great that it is far beyond the concep¬ 
tion of any human intellect. But if we go to the op¬ 
posite extreme we again find a limit to our powers. Let 
me give an example: 

I have before me a small slip of glass on which, by 
the aid of a microscope, I can find a speck which is al¬ 
together invisible to the naked eye, but on this speck 
is written the entire Lord’s Prayer in letters, which, 
though the writing is quite legible under a powerful mic¬ 
roscope, are so small that if the whole Bible were written 
in letters of the same size it (the Bible) would go eight 
times on a square inch, or two and a quarter times on 
one side of one of those little gold dollars which were at 
one time in use. We sometimes see the ten command¬ 
ments engraved on a nickel and even on a dime, and 
most people think that such work is very wonderful. 
But we can readily see it and understand it so that it 
requires no great mental effort to grasp it. But although 


28 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


the physical and mathematical demonstration* of the 
truth of the assertion that the whole Bible might be writ¬ 
ten on the one-eighth of a square inch, is perfect and 
easily followed, we have never yet found any one who 
could form a clear conception of the Bible’s being writ¬ 
ten on such a small space. In the same way, no human 
mind can grasp what is meant by a trillion. The fact 
is that the powers of the human mind are quite limited 
and it “staggers” under loads much lighter than the 
attempt to form a conception of a God who is the crea¬ 
tor and upholder of the universe. 

That God is invisible to mortal eyes causes no diffi¬ 
culty to the truly scientific man for he knows that our 
sense of vision is incapable of being affected by many 
things which we know have a real existence and which 
are capable of exerting tremendous power. No man 
ever saw electricity; the lightning flash, the arc light 
and the spark between the poles of a battery are certainly 
not electricity itself but merely matter heated by the 
action of electricity. And yet the fact that the Supreme 
Being is invisible to human eyes is urged by Haeckel as 
an argument against the existence of God, and he even 
goes so far as to say that if invisible he must be “a gas¬ 
eous vertebrate, ’ ’ whatever that may mean. This is cer¬ 
tainly a singularj)osition to be taken by one who claims 
to be a scientific man and especially by a biologist who 

*An unimpeachable mathematical demonstration of the truth of these 
statements, is given in the appendix to the Seven Follies of Science. 


of Design in the Creation. 


29 


must know that the scope of our organs of sense and es¬ 
pecially of our sense of vision is quite limited and fails 
to reveal many things of whose existence we have the 
most positive proof. But it shows the lengths to which 
an otherwise keen intellect may be driven by such anti¬ 
pathies as those which are known to exercise a powerful 
influence over Haeckel's mind and which obtrude them¬ 
selves on every page of his recent works, utterly regard¬ 
less not only of logic but of fact. 

Our ideas of God may now be obscure and to a certain 
extent, perhaps, even erroneous but we may rest assured 
that as we develop mentally and spiritually they will 
become clearer and truer although we may never in this 
life attain to a full realization of what His personality 
is, so that in this respect we are all, to a certain extent, 
little children. The “Everlasting Arms” are certainly 
not arms of flesh and blood and yet for all that they 
are those of our Father and they will be around us in 
our time of trouble and will uphold us in the day of ad¬ 
versity. 

That which is true of the actual child, the child of 
tender years, is quite as true of the childhood of the race. 
When the prophets of old told their hearers that “God 
spake and it was done,” there was no other language 
which could at all have expressed the idea which they 
intended to convey and which would have been under¬ 
stood by their hearers, although it is very certain that 
God never spake as man speaks. When Moses tells us 


30 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


that God said “Let there be light/’ the immature intel¬ 
lect, whether of actual childhood or of uneducated man¬ 
hood, no doubt imagines to itself the voice of God thun¬ 
dering through space, penetrating to the furthest corners 
of the vast expanse, and shaking the very foundations of 
hell with the articulate words of command! It does not 
realize that in space there is no medium by which the vi¬ 
brations which give rise to what we call sound might be 
produced and conveyed and even if such medium had 
existed it is very certain that at the creation of light there 
were no ears upon which such sound waves could make 
a vocal impression. Neither was it necessary. God will¬ 
ed that light should come forth and the energies of the 
material universe were set in action, bringing together 
the molecules of primeval matter which may have hither¬ 
to lain in stillness and darkness—‘ ‘ and there was light. ’ ’ 
The power of God is not always shown in ‘ ‘ the great and 
strong wind”* that rends the mountain and breaks in 
pieces the rock; nor in the earthquake; nor in the fire but 
in the still small voice which may be quite inaudible by 
human ears. 

“The nameless Power, or Powers, that rule 
Were never heard or seen.” 

But while the crude anthropomorphism of the child 
and the barbarian is to be unqualifiedly rejected, it does 
not follow that th^ higher anthropomorphism which is 

"*I Kings. XIX, 11. 


of Design in the Creation. 


3 


expressed in the divine statement that 11 God created man 
in his own image, in the image of God created he him,” 
is not absolutely true. Even the heathen philosophers 
of old were so deeply impressed with a sense of the cor¬ 
relation which exists between the mind of man and the 
external order of things—the Cosmos— that they were 
led to call man the Microcosm—the little universe in 
w T hich the great universe is reflected and to a certain ex¬ 
tent embodied. 

Viewed in this light the whole universe is anthropo¬ 
morphic; the dead matter of the earth and of the stars 
is the same matter as that out of which the material part 
of man is constructed for there is no fact in science more 
firmly established than that man was( and is) made out 
of the dust of the earth* and the laws which guide the 
movements of every atom which exists in all space are 
the laws which the mind of man is able to follow out and 
which call out his intellectual sympathy and excite his 
admiration to such an extent that he feels that he un¬ 
derstands the plan upon which the universe has been 
created, and that he is in touch and in sympathy with the 
supreme Intelligence which ordained all things—even 
with the Heavenly Father. 

Kepler, one of the greatest minds that ever lived; he 
whose work paved the way for Newton’s famous generali¬ 
zation, fully appreciated this and when the full force and 

* Bear in mind that the atmosphere, for all intents and purposes, is part 
of the earth. 


32 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


value of his discoveries burst upon his mental vision, and 
he saw that he had been able to follow and to explain 
the very laws according to which the planets move in 
their orbits, he could not help exclaiming: ‘ ‘ I thank thee, 
0 God, that I am able to think thy thoughts after thee! ’ ’ 

Therefore it seems to me that the term anthropomorph¬ 
ism has been frequently used altogether too much as a 
sort of bugbear with which to frighten those who are 
unable to take a broad and thoroughly scientific view of 
the question. As originally used to characterize and re¬ 
buke those who did not aspire to that which was really 
good, and yet who thought that God was “ altogether 
such an one as themselves, ’ ’—a God who might be bribed 
and who might be made partner in their iniquity, it was 
fitting and well employed, but when it is used as an epi¬ 
thet of opprobrium against those who believe in a per¬ 
sonal God endowed with the highest attributes of which 
the mind of man can conceive, many of which attributes, 
such as a sense of justice, of benevolence, and of beauty 
are shared also though no doubt in an infinitely lesser de¬ 
gree by man himself, it descends to the scurrilous and 
the ideas which it is intended to convey are neither true 
nor appropriate. 

And in my experience I have generally found that 
when I scratched a rapid anti-anthropomorphist I un¬ 
covered a full-fledged atheist posing under false colors. 


of Design in the Creation. 


33 


§ 4. Pantheism. 

It too often happens, however, that because men find 
it difficult to conceive of a personal God apart from 
some sort of semi-material embodiment, they are driven 
to an error which is the direct opposite of that of the 
child and of childish intellects, and adopt a view which 
reduces the idea of God to that of the vague, impersonal 
and universal pervasiveness known as pantheism. In¬ 
deed, some minds find it difficult to see distinctly the 
difference between that pantheism which is almost the 
equivalent of atheism and the belief in what theologians 
call the ‘‘ immanence ’ ’ of God but the difference is clear 
and decided as a little careful study will show. 

The following extract from Fisher’s Grounds of Theis- 
tic and Christian Belief , gives a very clear explanation of 
the difference between pantheism and that theism which 
is the foundation of the Christian faith: 

“Pantheism identifies God with the world, or the sum 
total of being. It differs from Atheism in holding to 
something besides and beneath finite things—an all-per¬ 
vading Cause or Essence. It differs from Deism in de¬ 
nying that God is separate from the world, and that the 
world is sustained and guided by energies exerted from 
without. It does not differ from Theism in affirming 


34 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

the immanence of God, for on this Theism likewise in¬ 
sists ; but it differs from Theism in denying to the imma¬ 
nent Power distinct consciousness and will, and an exis¬ 
tence not dependent on the world. Pantheism denies, 
and Theism asserts, creation. With the denial to God of 
will and conscious intelligence, Pantheism excludes de¬ 
sign. Finite things emerge into being and pass away, 
and the course of nature proceeds through the perpetual 
operation of an agency which has no cognizance of its 
work except so far as it may arrive at self-consciousness 
in man.” (Page 63.) 

Such then being the difference between Theism and 
Pantheism the reader must bear in mind that while every 
Christian must be a Theist it does not follow that every 
Theist is a Christian. To be a Christian one must believe 
not only in a personal God and in His constant govern¬ 
ment and guidance but in the divine mission of Jesus 
Christ. And while the Atheist and the Pantheist alike 
deny the existence of any aim, purpose or design in the 
universe, the intelligent Christian who has studied the 
physical and physiological relations of the world and its 
inhabitants, sees in every phenomenon and in every law 
the most unmistakeable evidence of these characteristics. 
And in nothing are these points more strongly and clear¬ 
ly manifested than in the origin and constitution of the 
atmosphere. The sacred writer tells us that one of the 
glories of God is that He declares “the end from the be¬ 
ginning and from ancient times the things that are not 


of Design in the Creation. 


35 


yet done.”* Man, who claims to have been created in 
His image, is likewise able in many cases to * ‘ declare the 
end from the beginning,” and this is truly a God-like 
attribute. 

That God not only foresaw those physical character¬ 
istics of the atmosphere which were necessary in order 
that the future inhabitants of this earth might live and 
thrive, but that the ordering of all things so that this re¬ 
sult might be brought about, was due to intelligent and 
ommipotent guidance and not to blind chance, or to the 
action of mere physical forces or laws must I think be 
evident to any unprejudiced mind that will carefully 
study the subject in all its relations. 


§ 5. Adaptation as Evidence of Intelligent Design. 

When we examine a well-made hammer we at once 
conclude that it was the product of intelligence and skill, 
and from this we intuitively infer that it was made by an 
expert mechanic. On the other hand, if we should find 
a mere stone with a hole in it through which a stick had 
somehow been passed, we might conclude that this simple 
combination, which might possibly be employed as a sub¬ 
stitute for a hammer, might have been the result of very 


♦Isaiah, XLVI, 10. 


36 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

simple natural forces aided by a fortunate accident. The 
hammer would carry marks of constructive design which 
would be absent in the case of the stone and stick, and 
these marks of skill, intelligence and above all of inten¬ 
tion, would be present in a still higher degree in a well- 
made watch, a microscope or a first-class battleship. If 
we study the latter and contemplate the steel-clad sides, 
the tremendous armament, the wonderful mechanism for 
propulsion and steering, and finally the carefully devised 
arrangements for the safety and comfort of those on 
board, we must be struck with the degree of intelligence 
and skill manifested in the building of what is unques¬ 
tionably the most powerful instrument for destruction or 
defence ever produced by man. And when we further 
consider that before a blow was struck in the making or 
a pound of material provided for the construction of 
this immense and complicated machine, the whole plan 
was developed in the mind of the naval constructor who 
thereupon proceeded to embody his ideas in drawings 
and sketches by which the mechanical operations were 
guided, we may form some faint idea of the wonderful 
character of the mental apparatus which set in motion 
the methods and means which resulted in the production 
of the actual ship. And yet men who acknowledge de¬ 
sign and intention in the case of the ship itself, refuse to 
accept the theory that the far more complicated mental 
apparatus which originated the design for the ship, also 
had a designer and* ^Constructor—in other words, they 


of Design in the Creation. 37 

claim that it was, to use their own expression, the result 
of “blind chance!” 

Certainly the monistic mechanical school who tell us 
that mind, spirit or soul is a mere function of the brain, 
and that “the brain secretes thought as the liver secretes 
bile,’ ’ must acknowledge that the design for a battleship 
or the plans for a notable architectural structure, or the 
contrivance of the methods and devices required for the 
working out of some great mechanical invention or scien¬ 
tific discovery, are marvellous ‘ ‘ secretions! ’ ’ 

For ourselves we feel that to believe that a few ma¬ 
terial cells, highly organized though they may be, should 
be capable, of themselves, by mere mechanical move¬ 
ments and chemical attractions, of originating and de¬ 
veloping such wonderful intellectual achievements, de¬ 
mands an exercise of faith, or, if you please, of credulity 
ten times greater than is required to believe in the exis¬ 
tence of a supreme Intelligence. 

At first sight it would seem that the more compli¬ 
cated and elaborate arrangements which are found in 
animal and vegetable structures would afford the strong¬ 
est proofs of intelligent design, and, which is more im¬ 
portant still, of wise intention or purpose—proofs far 
stronger than any which it would be possible to derive 
from the simpler combinations of the dead, material 
world. That this was the view of the older writers on the 
evidences of Christianity is well known. Nearly all of 
Paley’s illustrations of design in creation are drawn 


38 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

from structural features which are found in the animal 
and vegetable kingdoms. His celebrated comparison of 
the degree of intelligent design which would be demand¬ 
ed in the cases of the eye and the telescope, is familiar 
not only to those who have read his work on Natural The¬ 
ology but to every one who has listened to the general 
run of Sunday sermons and Sabbath school lessons. The 
same remark applies to the writings of the authors of 
the famous Bridgewater Treatises — the work of Sir 
Charles Bell on The Hand; Its Mechanism and Vital En¬ 
dowments as Evincing Design, being a notable instance 
of an elaborate attempt to prove intelligent design from 
the consideration of a most complicated structure whose 
every part, even to the minutest detail is not only admir¬ 
ably adjusted to every other part but is provided with 
means for repairing injuries and replacing worn out ele¬ 
ments. 

The celebrated Dr. Thomas Chalmers, in the first 
Bridgewater Treatise gives expression to this feeling in 
the following words: “It is passing marvellous that we 
should have more intense evidence for a God in the con¬ 
struction of an eye, than in the construction of the 
mighty planetarium—or that, within less than the com¬ 
pass of a handbreadth, we should find in this lower world 
a more pregnant and legible inscription of the Divinity 
than can be gathered from the br.oad and magnificent 
survey of the skies, lighted up though they be with the 
glories and wonders of astronomy. ’ 1 


of Design in the Creation. 


39 


Of late years, however, the arguments by which the 
older writers, Paley, the Bridgewater men, and others, 
enforced their conclusions have, in the minds of many, 
somewhat lost their force, the general reasons for this 
change of view being thus set forth by Professor Andrew 
Seth of the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, in his 
article on Paley in the Encyclopaedia Britannica: 

“He (Paley) everywhere insists upon the necessity, in 
each particular case, of an intelligent designing mind for 
the contriving and determining of the forms which or¬ 
ganized bodies bear. This is the whole argument and 
the book consists of a mass of well-chosen instances mar¬ 
shalled in support of it. But by placing Paley’s facts 
in a new light, the theory of evolution has deprived his 
argument of its force, so far as it applies the idea of 
special contrivance to individual organs or to species. 
Paley’s idea of contrivance is only applicable if we sup¬ 
pose a highly developed organism to be dropped sud¬ 
denly into foreign surroundings. But the relation of an 
organism to its environment is not of this external nat¬ 
ure, and the adaptation of the one to the other must be 
regarded as the result of a long process of interaction in 
the past history of the species. In thus substituting the 
operation of general laws for Paley’s continual invocation 
of a supernatural cause, evolution passes no judgment 
on the question of the ultimate dependence of these laws 
upon intelligence; but it evidently alters profoundly our 


40 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

general conception of tlie relation of that intelligence to 
the world. ’ * 

But while this may be true in regard to the application 
of “the idea of special contrivance to individual organs 
or to species,” it certainly cannot apply to previous ar¬ 
rangements and adaptations of unorganized matter, or 
to the adjustment of chemical compounds whose mode 
of action is invariable and well ascertained. 

If we should find obvious adaptations and adjustments 
in familiar departments of the inorganic kingdom, these 
adjustments being not only absolutely essential to the 
very existence of the present order of things, both as re¬ 
gards the organic and the inorganic kingdoms, but such 
as no mere evolutionary laws or forces could have deter¬ 
mined or brought about, surely in that case the objection 
urged by Professor Seth would not hold good. 

For example, Mr. John Burroughs gravely asserts that 
the air was not made for the lungs but that the lungs 
came into being because there was air. The lungs, how¬ 
ever, are but a small part of a very extensive system 
which depends upon the adaptation not only of air but of 
many other things, and if it can be shown that the air, 
as it now exists, is the only form of gaseous envelope that 
could be utilized under existing conditions, and that it is 
as ten millions to one that this envelope with its very 
complicated conditions, all adapted to sustain the growth 
of plants and animals, could not have been produced 
otherwise than through intelligent design and foresight, 


of Design in the Creation. 


4i 


the argument from design evidently remains unshaken. 
That such was the case I shall endeavor to show in the 
following pages, fully believing with John Stuart Mill, 
the famous logician (himself an agnostic, however) that 
those who would prove the existence of God should stick 
to the argument from design. 

Perhaps it is to avoid this conclusion that some modern 
materialistic atheists have fallen back on the old theory 
of ‘ ‘ the loves of the atoms ’ ’ and have endowed dead un¬ 
organized matter with intelligence. The claim is now 
seriously made that the attraction of the magnet for 
pieces of metal of certain kinds and the affinity exhibited 
by some of the elements for each other, differ only in 
degree and not in kind from the love of the mother for 
her child, or the lover for his mistress, and to the attrac¬ 
tion of organic particles for each other they actually at¬ 
tribute a romantic character. Thus Haeckel tells us that 
“Yvdien two cells (the ovum and the spermatozoon) meet 
they attract each other and become firmly attached. 
The main cause of this cellular attraction is a chemical 
sensitive action of the protoplasm allied to smell or taste, 
which we call ‘erotic chemicotropism;’ it may also be 
correctly (both in the chemical and the romantic sense) 
termed ‘cellular affinity’ or ‘sexual cell-love.” Biddle 
of the Universe, p. 49. 

That a biologist of any standing should make such a 
statement must surprise every one who has given the 
slightest attention to the physiology of the senses. Smell 


42 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

and taste are the result of a very complicated series of 
actions which demand for their development the pres¬ 
ence of membranes with special sensitiveness, nerves, 
brain and mind,—none of which are present in the ovum 
or spermatozoon, and to call the action of matter which 
is certainly not self-conscious, “sexual cell-love” is a 
mere “darkening of counsel with words without know¬ 
ledge. ’ * 

Surely few persons of ordinary intelligence will attri¬ 
bute such qualities to what we all believe to be insensate 
matter devoid of all consciousness, even if it be endowed 
with the properties of mechanical attraction and repul¬ 
sion. According to their own dogmas, sensation, con¬ 
sciousness and even mind itself are functions of organi¬ 
zation and to impute organization, in this sense, to mag 7 
nets or to pure oxygen, hydrogen or carbon is simply an 
abuse of language. 

It is easy to show that the material elements which 
form this globe, (whether found in the atmosphere or 
elsewhere) have been brought together and arranged, 
not only in regard to physical properties and chemical 
affinities and proportions but even in relation to the 
absolute quantity of the atmosphere itself so as to be 
nicely adjusted to the only conditions which would per¬ 
mit of the evolution of a being having the physiological 
and intellectual endowments of humanity and that the 
only material agencies which could act in this direction 
were the forces of physical attraction and chemical com- 


of Design in the Creation. 


43 


bination, blind forces acting under rigid material laws 
and certainly having no power to look beyond the action 
of the mere present; in other words, being utterly devoid 
of intention as regards future results. 

Since therefore, there was no power in the atmos¬ 
phere itself, or in the earth of which it forms a part, to 
bring about these momentous results, we are justified in 
attributing the present condition of things to the creative 
and guiding power of One who beheld the end from the 
beginning and “saw everything that he had made and 
behold it was very good. ’ ’ 


§6. “Natural Law.” “The Reign of Law.” 

The expressions “Natural Law” and “The Reign of 
Law” have in recent years come into great favor with a 
certain class of popular writers and their readers, and 
if the ideas which these phrases are intended to convey 
are kept strictly within proper bounds and properly ap¬ 
plied, the phrases themselves are both appropriate and 
effective. But on most minds these terms have an effect 
greater than that which the actual facts and conditions 
will warrant. This is because they seem to imply the 
existence of a power which mere laws, of themselves, do 
not possess. This is one of the fundamental fallacies 


44 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

which underlie Haeckel’s attempted solution of “The 
Riddle of the Universe his view seems to be that his 
much-vaunted “Law of Substance” is not only a rule or 
command which nature is bound to obey and from which 
there can be no appeal, but that it is an actual power 
capable of setting that command in action, whereas nat¬ 
ural law is merely the mode of action of the various forms 
of energy which are at work in this universe. The word 
law , as used in this connection, is, to say the least, some¬ 
what unfortunate because it conveys to the ordinary 
mind an idea of arbitrary legislation like that of human 
government, something which unquestionably has no 
place in the economy of nature. To use the words of 
John Stuart Mill: “The expression, Laws of Nature, 
means nothing but the uniformities which exist among 
natural phenomena (or, in other words, the results of in¬ 
duction) when reduced to their simplest expression. It 
is, however, something to have advanced so far as to see 
that the study of nature is the study of laws, not a law; 
of uniformities, in the plural number; that the different 
natural phenomena have their separate rules or modes of 
taking place, which, though much intermixed and en¬ 
tangled with one another may to a certain extent be 
studied apart: that the regularity which exists in nature 
is a web composed of different threads, and only to be 
understood by tracing each of the threads separately.” 

On careful examination it is easily seen that in many 
cases the term law is properly applied to what is simply 


of Design in the Creation. 45 

the mode of action of certain forms of energy. For ex¬ 
ample: The fundamental law of gravitation is that the 
attraction of two bodies for each other is directly pro¬ 
portional to the masses and inversely to the squares of 
their distances from each other. Now this law, when 
analyzed, is found to be merely a mathematical express¬ 
ion of the mode of action of the force of gravitation, as 
is obvious when we translate the above formula into com¬ 
mon language. Thus to say that the attraction is direct¬ 
ly as the masses, is simply to say that twice the quantity 
of any material will weigh twice as much as the original 
quantity, or that on a globe twice the size of the earth, a 
piece of lead which weighs one pound here would weigh 
two pounds there, and this still further reduces itself to 
the mathematical statement that one, added to one makes 
two. 

On the other hand, the law which is said to govern the 
relation of distance to attraction is simply the statement 
that a surface having twice the length and twice the 
breadth of another surface, has four times the area of the 
latter, and further that if we cause a given amount of 
energy to act over four times the area over which it was 
formerly spread, it will act with just one-fourth of the 
original intensity. 

When thus analyzed these laws are seen to be mere¬ 
ly the mathematical expression of certain modes of ac¬ 
tion which we cannot conceive to be otherwise than as 
they are. For example: It would be impossible for us 


46 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

to conceive that a surface which was twice as long and 
twice as broad as another surface should not contain four 
times the area of the latter, or that the three angles of a 
plane triangle should not be equal to two right angles. 
To adopt the words of John Stuart Mill in regard to a 
similar case, such a condition of things would be not 
only inconceivable to us, “but we cannot conceive that it 
should be made conceivable” Jevons even goes so far 
as to say that “we cannot conceive that even Omnipotent 
power should make the angles of a triangle greater than 
two right angles.’’ 

It is with the term law, however, as it is with the word 
evolution; to most minds it carries a signification much 
stronger than the reality will warrant, and many per¬ 
sons speak of law when they mean energy or force. Thus 
law, of itself, has no power to move even a grain of sand, 
while gravitation sends worlds whirling through space 
as if they were billiard-balls. The unseen, and, so far 
as our senses are directly concerned, the unrecognizable 
power of gravitation holds the earth in its orbit with a 
force which, if replaced by iron rods, would require 
more than sixty bars, each having a area of one square 
inch, on every square foot of the earth’s surface that is 
exposed to the sun. But this mighty power owes its 
efficiency to the attraction itself and not to any mere 
law of its action. 


of Design in the Creation. 47 

But while those laws which are the mathematical ex¬ 
pression of modes of action are beyond all question un¬ 
alterable, it does not follow that the properties of mat¬ 
ter, to which these actions are due, are unalterable. 

Upon this point Jevons, who has made a careful logi¬ 
cal and philosophical study of the subject, says in his 
Principles of Sciences “A law of nature, as I regard 
the meaning of the expression, is not a uniformity 
which must be obeyed by all objects, but merely a uni¬ 
formity which is, as a matter of fact, obeyed by those 
objects which have come beneath our observation. There 
is nothing whatever incompatible with logic in the dis¬ 
covery of objects which should prove exceptions to any 
law of nature. Perhaps the best established law is that 
which asserts an invariable correlation to exist between 
gravity and inertia, so that all gravitating bodies are 
found to possess inertia and all bodies possessing inertia 
are found to gravitate. But it would be no reproach 
to our scientific method, if something were ultimately 
discovered to possess gravity without inertia. Strictly 
defined and correctly interpreted, the law itself would 
acknowledge the possibility; for with the statement of 
every law we ought properly to join an estimate of the 
number of instances in which it has been observed to 
hold true, and the probability thence calculated that it 
will hold true in the next case. Now no finite number 
of instances can warrant us in expecting with certainty 


48 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

that the next instance will be of like nature; in the for¬ 
mulas yielded by the inverse method of probabilities a 
unit always appears to represent the probability that 
our inference will be mistaken. I demur to the assump¬ 
tion that there is any necessary truth even in such fun¬ 
damental laws of nature as the Indestructibility of mat¬ 
ter, the Conservation of Energy, or the Laws of Mo¬ 
tion. Certain it is that men of science have recognized 
the conceivability of other laws, and even investigated 
their mathematical consequences. Airy investigated 
the mathematical conditions of a perpetual motion and 
Laplace and Newton discussed imaginary laws of forces 
inconsistent with those observed to operate in the uni¬ 
verse. ’’ 

It is evident from this that a law cannot be used to 
prove anything; a law is something that requires proof 
for itself and all we can say in this connection respect¬ 
ing any fact is that it conforms to a given law; it is 
utterly illogical to say as Haeckel says (page 90) “one 
of the first things to be proved by the law of substance 
is the basic fact that any natural force can be directly 
or indirectly converted into any other.’’ The “basic 
fact” can be proved only by induction from a wide 
range of instances; when that has been done a law may 
be formulated which may be very serviceable as a guide 
to other facts in the same class, and by analogy to facts 
of another class. But to say that we can prove a fact 


of Design in the Creation. 


49 


by a law is illogical to the verge of absurdity. It is cer¬ 
tainly a glaring instance of putting the cart before the 
horse. 

The reader should therefore divest his mind of any 
superstitious veneration for the expressions “Natural 
Law 9 9 and ‘ ‘ Eeign of Law ’’; the real power lies in that 
which is behind the law, not in the law itself. 


§ 7. Creation by Law as Distinguished from Crea¬ 
tion by Fiat. 

The first chapter of the book of Genesis opens with 
a series of “fiats” or commands, and we are told that 
in obedience to these the various progressive steps which 
occurred in the development of this earth and its inhabi¬ 
tants took place. The idea which might be conveyed by 
this account, and indeed that which no doubt is ordi¬ 
narily adopted by the child and by the untutored adult 
mind is that each step took place at once as soon as the 
command was uttered, or, as the poet expresses it: 

“At once the lion and the worm 
Sprung- from the teeming ground.” 

This was the view which was held almost universally 
until well within the last century. It is usually known 
as “creationism” as opposed to “evolution.” But the 


50 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


interpretation which is given to the language of the sac¬ 
red writer by modern science is on a plane which is far 
higher than these old ideas while at the same time the 
scientific view or interpretation is not in any sense an¬ 
tagonistic to the idea of the supreme power and effi¬ 
ciency of God; the difference merely refers to His mode 
of action and attributes to Him the ordaining of gen¬ 
eral laws as they are commonly called, through which 
His purposes are wrought out, instead of supposing Him 
to act by partial and spasmodic efforts. The scientific 
mode of describing the creative work presents a view 
which is not only sublime but which is in strict accord 
with all our higher ideas of nature and of nature’s God, 
the other being the expression of a childish view of great 
truths—such a view as is entertained by minds unaccus¬ 
tomed to deal with abstract ideas and unfamiliar with 
any of the facts and principles which have been re¬ 
vealed by modern science, and which are expressed in 
the formulae of unvarying modes of action or, as they 
are generally called, laws. Aside, from any question in 
regard to scientific accuracy of detail, the account of 
the creation as given in the first chapter of Genesis is, 
from this point of view, grand beyond expression even 
to those who are unable to rise to a full comprehension 
of its meaning, and it must be very evident even to 
those least acquainted with the history and habits of 
thought of the ancient people to whom it was addressed, 


of Design in the Creation. 51 

that if the writer of Genesis had clothed his account 
of the creation in the form and language of the science 
of to-day, not one of his readers would have understood 
him. His great object evidently was to impress the peo¬ 
ple with the fact that there is but one God who is the 
author and creator of the universe, and that He is in¬ 
finite in power and wisdom. That this ancient writer 
had a difficult task before him was shown by the epi¬ 
sode of the golden calf; a concrete embodiment of some¬ 
thing which appealed to the carnal senses seems to have 
been necessary to the minds of those whom he addressed, 
and their ideas of worship tended to raise up gods many, 
and lords man}^. To-day it seems to be the fashion 
with some to go to the opposite extreme and to deny 
the existence of any God whatever. 

That instead of being instantaneous each step in the 
creative process progressed at a rate which to our lim¬ 
ited intellects seems to have been very slow and gradual, 
is amply proved by those records of nature which we 
have been able to decipher. A study of the heavens 
shows us suns which must have been in existence for 
periods so great that the human mind can form no con¬ 
ception whatever of the length of their duration. Some 
of these suns or stars have even become dark; perhaps 
they have existed so long that they are actually burnt 
out and cooled down. Even our own little earth which 
from its relatively small size must have cooled with 


52 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

comparative rapidity and consequently can have ex¬ 
isted only for a period which is trifling when compared 
with the age of some of the other stellar bodies, has a 
recorded age compared with w T hich the duration of man 
as a species is but as a moment. But all through these 
long ages steady progress was made in the advance to 
such a condition as would fit this earth for the highest 
organic development of which it has ever been capable 
or of which it probably ever will be capable. The earth 
has now cooled to a point where much further depress¬ 
ion of temperature w T ould in all likelihood affect in¬ 
juriously the human race and although we may have 
some millions of years yet before us for improvement, 
for development and for discoveries, it is more than 
likely that man, as a type, is the culmination of organic 
development on this globe, and that no higher incar¬ 
nation of mind will ever people this planet. This is 
not to say that the coming man may not make wonderful 
advances both physically and mentally, and perhaps even 
develope new senses and new sense-organs which will 
give him power to observe that which as yet “eye hath 
not seen nor ear heard, nor hath it entered into the heart 
of man to conceive.” He may attain not merely in¬ 
creasing power for the old senses but absolutely new 
“gateways” as old John Bunyan called them; new 
avenues by which hitherto unknown phenomena may 
reach our brains and minds through new sensations and 


of Design in the Creation. 53 

open up to us hitherto untrodden and even unthought 
of fields of knowledge. There is no reason why we 
may not acquire new senses which will be to us as novel 
as would be the sense of sight or of hearing to a race that 
had never developed these senses and sense-organs. 
Nevertheless Agassiz was no doubt right when he said 
that there is no probability of any general organiza¬ 
tion higher than that of man ever making its appear¬ 
ance on this earth. 

That all this has been brought about through the 
operation of forces acting in accordance with general 
laws or modes of action, or, in other words, by evolution, 
is as certain as anything can be, for we can trace the 
action, follow each step and formulate the processes or 
methods according to which the results have been de¬ 
veloped. But this fact does not weaken in the slight¬ 
est degree the evidence which goes to prove that the 
ultimate result is wholly due to the guidance of a supreme 
Intelligence. Upon this point we may quote the words 
of Dr. William B. Carpenter, the famous physiologist 
and biologist, who says: “The evidence of final causes 
is not impaired. We simply, to use the language of 
Whewell, ‘transfer the notion of design and end from 
the region of facts to that of laws;’ that is, from the 
particular cases to the general plan. In this general 
plan the production of man is comprehended.” 

Through all these changes and progressive steps the 


54 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

constituents of the atmosphere played an important 
part. Changing, as we shall see hereafter, both in quantity 
and in composition at the various stages through which 
the earth passed during that process of development 
which has resulted in rendering it a suitable habitation 
for plants and animals, it progressed from a condition 
in which it would have been positively fatal to all ani¬ 
mal life and has been gradually purified and adjusted 
until at length it has reached its present state in which 
it is truly “the breath of life” to man and all living 
creatures. Without the atmosphere or with an atmos¬ 
phere of even a slightly different constitution, animal 
and vegetable life as we know it would have been im¬ 
possible. And the changes which might have occurred 
during the evolution of this earth and which would 
have rendered the atmosphere entirely unfit for the sup¬ 
port of life, and especially for the development of human 
life, are, as we shall see, so minute and involve such a 
slight departure from the actual course of events as they 
occurred that the unprejudiced mind cannot resist the 
conclusion that the present outcome was the result of 
guidance on the part of an intelligent and self-con¬ 
scious Power. 


of Design in the Creation. 


55 


§ 8. Evolution. 

In the minds of many persons the word ‘‘ evolution 9 9 
carries an almost ocehlt meaning and seems to denote 
some mysterious power which is capable of explaining 
all those riddle-like questions which confront us at every 
step in our investigations regarding the origin, nature 
and final outcome of the world in which we live, as 
well as in regard to our own being and destiny. 

The same thing has occurred in the past in regard to 
many other words and phrases. The time was when 
every phenomenon that was not understood and every 
occurrence in nature that could not be otherwise ac¬ 
counted for, was explained by reference to the mys¬ 
terious power of ‘ * electricity ’but as we became more 
familiar with that powerful agent it seemed to become 
less mysterious and men learned to limit their references 
to it to those cases in which it could be proved to exert 
a recognizable and definite action. When, for any given 
phenomenon, we cannot find a sound and reasonable 
explanation based upon thoroughly established grounds, 
it becomes us to acknowledge our ignorance and to con¬ 
fess that we do not know. But there are those who seem 
to feel that a confession of ignorance lowers their self- 


56 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

importance and consequently they feel bound to attempt 
an explanation of every phenomenon to which their 
attention is called whether they understand it or not. 
The reader has no doubt met many such persons. To 
people of this class the term “evolution’’ is a veritable 
godsend. Such persons forget that a sense of ignor¬ 
ance is the mother of progress. 

Unfortunately it is not the lower grades of mind orjly 
that are thus affected. It is surprising what a tremen¬ 
dous influence some new, unusual or half-understood 
word may have not only on common minds but upon 
those of men who in their own special departments stand 
very high. Those who have read carefully the writings 
of Haeckel cannot fail to see that in many cases he is the 
slave of a terminology which seems to him to afford 
explanations while in fact it merely changes the form 
of expression, just as we gain nothing by way of expla¬ 
nation when instead of saying that an apple “ falls to 
the ground ’ ’ we say that it is ‘ * drawn downward by the 
force of gravitation. ’ ’ Such a form of language throws 
no light upon the nature of the phenomena involved 
although it may perhaps enable us to distinguish the 
force of gravity from that of magnetism and to connect 
the falling of the apple with the motion of the moon. 
But upon the nature of that mysterious form of energy 
which causes the motion alike of the apple and of the 
moon, it throws no light whatever. 


of Design in the Creation. 57 

This mode of ‘ ‘ explaining ’ ’ things was ridiculed long 
ago in the French play in which the doctor tells his 
hearers that the reason why opium causes sleep is “be¬ 
cause it has a soporific quality.” 

Evolution simply means unfolding or development, 
and it is properly applied both to inorganic progress- 
ional changes and to the growth or development of veg¬ 
etable and animal organisms. Consequently all the pro¬ 
cesses of evolution themselves require explanation by 
exact reference to the forces and laws which are at work 
in each particular instance, and we gain nothing except 
precision of language by the use of the word though this 
may often be of great advantage, for by grouping to¬ 
gether the various processes concerned in any particular 
case, they are frequently made to throw much light upon 
each other, and in this way we often obtain clearer ideas 
of many of the phenomena which we meet in our study 
of nature, but we must always remember that evolution, 
of itself, is not, as is too commonly supposed by the 
ordinary reader, a force, power or form of energy but 
merely a process in which certain special forms of en¬ 
ergy and modes of action operate according to definite 
and more or less well ascertained laws. 

And we must always bear in mind that the process of 
evolution as it occurs in the development of living or¬ 
ganisms is carried on under conditions markedly differ¬ 
ent from those which prevail in the case of mere dead 


58 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

matter such as the material out of which suns, planets 
and satellites are produced. It is evident that in the 
former case the great principles of natural selection and 
“the survival of the fittest” may come into full play; 
in other words, that there is an element of choice or se¬ 
lection which exerts a powerful influence in directing 
the lines of progress into particular channels, and 
whether this influence is guided by intelligence or not, 
almost all evolutionists believe that it exists and that to it 
is largely due the development of species and the im¬ 
provement of races. 

In the case of what may be called inorganic develop¬ 
ment or evolution there is no such influence and there can 
be none. There is no competition amongst suns or plan¬ 
ets; with them everything moves in obedience to the 
laws of dynamics and chemistry, but in the case of 
plants, not only that species but that particular variety 
of the species which is best adapted to its environment 
will thrive best and will crowd out its rivals. So too 
the individual plant which produces the most showy 
flowers, or which secretes the most nectar will attract 
the most insects, will have its seed-producing organs 
most thoroughly fertilized and will be most likely to 
perpetuate its kind. The same holds true in the case of 
animals; the swiftest hound will secure the most prey, 
will gain in strength and will transmit to his descendants 
the qualities which gave him the advantage over others. 


of Design in the Creation. 59 

On the other hand, the swiftest hares are most apt to 
escape from the dogs and transmit their fleetness to 
their progeny while the slow and the lame are caught 
and devoured. 

That which is true of species and varieties applies 
also to the development of special organs. The evolu¬ 
tionist claims that the eye probably began as a sensitive 
speck at the termination of a nerve in some low form of 
animal life; this sensitiveness enabled its possessor to 
detect and escape from its enemies and to locate and 
procure food, and the organ was gradually developed 
to the keenness found in the hawk and the wonderful 
power and expression found in man, but, as Jevons says: 
‘‘the ultimate result must have been contained in the 
aggregate of causes, and these causes as far as we can 
see, were subject to the arbitrary choice of the Creator. ” 

Viewed from this standpoint evolution is merely the 
manifestation of “creation by law” as opposed to crea¬ 
tion by processless fiat and certainly the former is more 
in conformity with what we know of God’s methods in 
nature than is the latter. And that the doctrine of evo¬ 
lution is not antagonistic to that of divine creation and 
government as is so constantly and bitterly urged by 
Haeckel, has been very clearly set forth by Professor W. 
Stanley Jevons in his treatise on The Principles of 
Science, a work which is an acknowledged authority 
amongst scientific men and is free from the supercilious- 


60 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

ness and bias which unfortunately characterize too 
many of the books which have been written on both sides 
of this question. Jevons says: “Theologians have dread¬ 
ed the establishment of the theories of Darwin and Hux¬ 
ley and Spencer, as if they thought that these theories 
could explain everything upon the purest mechanical and 
material principles, and exclude all notions of design. 
They do not see that those theories have opened up more 
questions than they have closed. The doctrine of evolu¬ 
tion gives a complete explanation of no living form. 
While showing the general principles which prevail in 
the variation of living creatures, it only points out the 
infinite complexity of the causes and circumstances 
which have led to the present state of things. Any one 
of Mr. Darwin’s books, admirable though they all are, 
consists but in the setting forth of a multitude of inde¬ 
terminate problems. He proves in the most beautiful 
manner that each flower of an orchid is adapted to some 
insect which frequents and fertilizes it, and these adap¬ 
tations are but a few cases of those immensely numerous 
ones which have occurred in the lives of plants and ani¬ 
mals. But why orchids should have been formed so dif¬ 
ferently from other plants, why anything, indeed, should 
be as it is, rather than in some of the other infinitely 
numerous possible modes of existence, he can never show. 
The origin of everything that exists is wrapped up in 
the past history of the universe. At some one or more 


of Design in the Creation. 61 

points in past time there must have been arbitrary de¬ 
terminations which led to the production of things as 
they are.” 

And that this was markedly true in the case 
of the atmosphere I hope to prove beyond all question. 

A very common objection to the doctrine of evolution 
and one which is frequently offered by superficial de- 
claimers against the theory, is that evolution is said to 
assert that man is descended from the monkey, and that 
this hypothesis is one which is degrading to humanity, 
and the strenuous demand for and search after the so- 
called 4 ‘ missing link 9 9 shows what a firm hold this erron¬ 
eous idea has upon the popular mind. Upon this point 
Sir Oliver Lodge, in his recent work, The Substance of 
Faith Allied With Science } says: “The popular miscon¬ 
ception concerning the biological origin of man, that he 
is descended from monkeys like those of the present day, 
is a trivial garbling of truth. The elevated and the de¬ 
graded branches of a family can both trace their descent 
from a parent stock; and though the distant common an¬ 
cestor may now be lost in obscurity, there is certainly in 
this sense a blood relationship between the quadrumana 
and the bimana: a relationship which is recognized and is 
practically useful in the investigations of experimental 
pathology . 9 9 

That our sun with all its planets and their satellites 
was slowly evolved from a primeval nebula, “fire-mist” 


62 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

or aggregation of meteorites is now the accepted belief 
of almost all scientific men, the process by which this 
was accomplished being told at length in a very clear 
and interesting manner in Sir Robert S. Ball’s Earth’s 
Beginnings. The nebula which formed our system grad¬ 
ually condensed, the central nucleus ultimately forming 
the sun while that portion of the material which formed 
the planets and their satellites was left behind and under 
new conditions and aggregations continued to revolve 
around the central orb. 

It was through this process that our earth acquired a 
separate existence, for it is very certain that at one time 
it formed part of a general mass from which the sun and 
planets were evolved and our attention ought now to be 
directed to the gradual development or evolution of the 
atmosphere but before we take up this subject it will be 
necessary to glance at the physical properties and chem¬ 
ical constitution of the air so that the reader may be 
able to follow intelligently the various changes which oc¬ 
curred. 


of Design in the Creation. 


63 


§ 9. The Natural Philosophy of the Atmosphere. 

Elementary science is now so popular and science¬ 
teaching has been so generally introduced not only into 
our technical schools and academies but into the higher 
grades of our common schools, that many of our readers 
are, no doubt, quite familiar with the facts and princi¬ 
ples of which we now propose to give a brief account. 
Under these circumstances the subject may perhaps ap¬ 
pear to some to be too commonplace for explanation in 
these pages, nevertheless, for the sake of many who have 
not had an opportunity to acquire the special knowledge 
involved, or who may have forgotten what they once 
knew, it may be well to present a condensed statement of 
those particular points which have a direct bearing upon 
our general argument. 

The aerial or gaseous envelope which surrounds the 
earth, covering its entire surface to a great depth and 
which is known as the air or atmosphere is, at least in 
some of its phases, a familiar object to us all. When in 
rapid motion, as in winds, hurricanes and cyclones, it is 
capable of producing the most powerful effects—effects 
which are sometimes terribly disastrous. On the other 
hand, when it is quite still we are scarcely conscious of 


64 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

its presence and in common language we speak of a ves¬ 
sel which contains only air as being empty while poets 
speak of “airy nothings” and “trifles light as air” just 
as if air had no substance whatever. Even the scientific 
men of ancient times thought that the air was without 
weight and Aristotle believed that he had proved this 
when he weighed a skin that had been inflated and also 
the same skin after the air had been expelled from it 
and found no difference. He did not know that the in¬ 
flated skin was buoyed up by the surrounding air just 
as a piece of wood floating in water is buoyed up by that 
liquid. It did not occur to him that if he were to weigh 
an empty skin in water and also the same skin filled with 
water, but still immersed in the liquid, he would find 
that in both cases the skin would weigh exactly the same. 
And yet every one knows that a skin full of water, if 
weighed in air, weighs much more than the same skin 
when empty. 

After the invention of the air-pump by Otto Guericke, 
about 1650, it was easy to determine the weight of a given 
bulk of air, and in many operations in the arts the 
weight of the air that is required is as much a matter of 
consideration as is the weight of iron or bricks. The 
weight which a given bulk of air possesses is often a mat¬ 
ter of great surprise to those who are not familiar with 
such subjects. By exhausting the air from a glass globe, 
weighing the globe carefully and then admitting air and 


of Design in the Creation. 65 

weighing it again, it is found that 100 cubic inches of 
air weigh 31 grains, so that 13 cubic feet would weigh 
just about one pound. From this it follows that since a 
room 30 feet long, 28 feet wide and 19 feet high, would 
contain 15,960 cubic feet, the air in it would weigh 1,227 
lbs. or rather more than half a long ton. 

That air has weight may be shown very easily without 
the use of any complicated apparatus or even of any 
airpump. It is quite possible by means of the mouth 
alone to suck out of a light flask an amount of air suf¬ 
ficient to cause the flask and its contents to be lighter 
than it would be after the air is again admitted, and this 
may be proved by a balance of very simple construction. 

Since the air has weight, we would naturally expect 
that it would press upon the surface of the earth with 
considerable force, in the same way that water is known 
to do, and such indeed is found to be actually the case 
as is easily proved by a number of experiments. If we 
place on the plate of an air-pump a receiver with an 
opening in the top that may be covered by the palm of 
the hand, and then give a few strokes, the hand will be 
pressed downward by the weight of the air which rests 
upon it, and the experiment may easily be carried so far 
as to be quite painful. If the opening in the top of the 
receiver be large, and a sheet of ordinary window glass 
be laid on it, with a rubber ring to make an air-tight 
joint, as soon as the air beneath the plate is removed the 


66 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

superincumbent air will exert so much pressure that the 
glass plate will be broken. Instead of a glass plate, a 
piece of bladder is usually stretched tightly over the top 
of the receiver. The bladder is stretched while it is wet 
and when it dries it contracts and becomes as tense as a 
drumhead. When the air is removed from the receiver, 
the pressure of the air that rests on the bladder causes 
the membrane to burst with a loud report. 

Carefully conducted experiments show that the pres¬ 
sure exerted by the air varies from time to time within 
considerable limits, the average being 14.73 lbs. to the 
square inch at the level of the sea. A square inch is a 
very small space, and when we calculate the pressure on 
larger surfaces the result seems to be enormous. Thus, 
the table at which I am now writing is circular and a 
little over four feet in diameter so that it has an area 
of nearly 14 square feet. The column of air which rests 
upon this table and which extends to the top of the at¬ 
mosphere, would therefore weigh about 14 tons, a weight 
which would probably break the .table if it were not 
counter-balanced by the upward pressure of air upon 
the under surface as we shall explain presently. 

The column of air which rests upon an ordinary hat, 
including the brim, weighs nearly 1,200 lbs. a load which, 
if unbalanced, would crush an average man to the earth. 

But like all other fluids—water, oil, gas, etc.—air ex¬ 
erts pressure in every direction—upward as well as down- 


of Design in the Creation. 67 

ward—upon all objects immersed in it. That air exerts 
an upward pressure is easily proved by a very simple 
experiment. Take an ordinary tumbler or wine-glass and 
fill it with water; cover the mouth of the vessel with a 
piece of paper, lay the palm of the hand or a smooth 
board over the paper and quickly invert the glass. On 
removing the hand or the board the water will not run 
out and the sheet of paper will be kept in its place by the 
upward pressure of the air beneath it. The inverted 
tumbler may even be held over the flame of a lamp and 
as the water prevents the paper from being burned, it 
may be held there until it gets quite warm, care being 
taken not to carry the experiment so far as to make the 
water boil for in that case the pressure of the steam 
would overcome the pressure of the air and both water 
and paper would drop down. 

That the paper, and with it the water, is held in place 
by the upward pressure of the air is easily proved by 
placing the tumbler, arranged in the way we have de¬ 
scribed, under the receiver of an air-pump. On remov¬ 
ing the upward pressure by exhausting the air, the water 
and paper fall down. 

A remarkable property of all gases, including air, is 
their perfect elasticity. When subjected to pressure they 
contract and when the pressure is removed they at once 
expand and regain their former bulk. And since the 
air in the upper strata of the atmosphere presses upon 


68 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

that in the lower strata with a weight which as we have 
seen is nearly equal to 15 lbs. on the square inch, we 
would naturally expect that the lower strata would be 
compressed and rendered more dense and on examination 
we find this to be the case. The mercury in the baro¬ 
meter continually falls as we ascend because there is less 
and less air above us as we go up, and a balloon if com¬ 
pletely filled with gas at the level of the sea, would burst 
when it reached a height of a few hundred feet if pro¬ 
vision were not made by which some of the gas might 
escape. 

When we ascend from the base to the top of a tall 
building or a small hill, our feelings do not usually make 
us conscious of any change in the density of the atmos¬ 
phere. The air may seem purer because we have got 
away from contaminating influences such as dust, the 
smoke and gas from fires, the smells of decaying animal 
and vegetable matter, etc. but we do not feel any change 
in its density or in the pressure which it exerts although, 
by using proper instruments even of no great delicacy, it 
may be clearly shown that such changes have occurred, 
and if the delicacy of our instruments be sufficiently 
increased, it can be proved beyond all question that there 
is a marked difference between the density of the air 
next to the ground and that which is two or three feet 
higher up, say on the top of a common table. But if we 
rapidly ascend a high mountain, so that our system is not 


of Design in the Creation. 69 

given sufficient time in which to adjust itself to the new 
conditions, it will be felt that the lungs cannot take in an 
amount of the now attenuated air sufficient to enable 
us to walk or run with our usual vigor. This is well 
known to those who make a rapid journey across the 
American continent. At the highest points of the 
Rocky Mountains many travelers, especially if they are 
advanced in years, suffer considerably from this feel¬ 
ing ; they find that the least exertion tires them and they 
cannot take into the lungs a supply of air sufficient to 
enable them to endure ordinary exercise. Other diffi¬ 
culties, such as bleeding at the nose, etc., caused by the 
diminished pressure, arise and these effects are so well 
known in those regions to which travelers resort for the 
purpose of mountain climbing, that they have received 
a special name —mal des montagnes or mountain sickness. 
As a consequence of this, visitors to Pike’s Peak who are 
not strong and vigorous, are cautioned against making 
the ascent although no muscular exertion is required to 
enable the traveler to reach the top, the passengers being 
carried up by mechanical means. 

The same thing occurs in making balloon ascents to 
great altitudes. The greatest height attained by bal¬ 
loons with passengers is 6.83 miles (36,080 feet). This 
was reached by Glaisher. At this height the density 
of the air was reduced to one-fourth of that at the sea- 
level and the effects were very severe. Taught by Mr. 


70 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

Glaisher’s experience, other aeronauts have in subsequent 
ascensions carried up with them a supply of highly oxy¬ 
genized air and breathed that with very beneficial re¬ 
sults although some of the direct effects of diminished 
pressure were not avoided. 

Another curious result of diminished pressure is seen 
in the effect which it has on the boiling point of water. 
It is generally known that water in an open vessel boils 
at a temperature of 212 deg. Fahr. and no addition of 
heat can make it any hotter. But in the boiler of a steam 
engine under a pressure of 100 lbs. to the square inch, 
the temperature rises to nearly 330 deg. and on the other 
hand, when the pressure is reduced below the standard 
(15 lbs. to the square inch) the temperature of the boil¬ 
ing point is also lowered. From this cause it is some¬ 
times difficult to cook eggs by boiling in places which 
are greatly elevated, such as on high mountains; hence it 
follows that if our atmosphere had been greatly dimin¬ 
ished we would not have been able to cook our food prop¬ 
erly by boiling while if it had been greatly increased 
much of our food would have been burned before the 
water reached the boiling point. This seems to be an 
adjustment which could never have been brought about 
by “natural selection.” f 

An interesting question here presents itself: To what 
height above the surface of the earth does the atmosphere 


of Design in the Creation. 71 

extend and has it a definite limit, or does it gradually 
shade away into space ? 

The height of the atmosphere has been variously esti¬ 
mated at from 40 to 300 miles but a careful consideration 
of the rapid rate at which its density diminishes as we 
ascend, leads to the conclusion that the latter estimate 
is far in excess of the reality. At a height of 3.4 miles 
(17,952 feet) the density of the air is reduced to one-half 
of that which it has at the level of the sea and at a height 
of 17 miles (89,760 feet) the density is reduced to the 
one-thirty-second part of that at sea-level. Upon this 
point Herschel says (Astronomy par. 33) : “An easy cal¬ 
culation founded on our experimental knowledge of the 
properties of air and the mechanical laws which regulate 
its dilatation and compression, is sufficient to show that, 
at an altitude above the surface of the earth not exceed¬ 
ing the hundredth part of its diameter (80 miles) the 
tenuity or rarefaction of the air must be so excessive that 
not only animal life could not subsist or combustion be 
maintained in it, but that the most delicate means we 
possess of ascertaining the existence of any air at all 
would fail to afford the slightest perceptible indications 
of its presence. ” 

And Dr. Thomas Young has calculated that if the air 
continued to diminish indefinitely in density according 
to Mariotte’s law, 1 cubic inch of air of the mean density 
of that at the surface of the earth would, at a distance 


72 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

of 4,000 miles from the earth’s surface (or at a distance 
equal to the earth’s radius) fill a sphere the diameter 
of which is equal to that of the orbit of Saturn. 

As regards a definite limit to the height of the atmos¬ 
phere Herschel says: “Arguments are not wanting to 
render it, if not absolutely certain, at least in the high¬ 
est degree probable, that the surface of the aerial, like 
that of the aqueous ocean has a real and definite limit 
beyond which there is positively no air and above which 
a fresh quantity of air, could it be added from without 
or carried aloft from below, instead of dilating itself 
indefinitely upwards would, after a certain very enor¬ 
mous but still finite enlargement of volume, sink and 
merge, as water poured into the sea, and distribute itself 
among the mass beneath.” 

It is generally supposed that the temperature of space 
approaches that of absolute zero which is-461 deg. Fahr. 
or-272.72 Per Cent. Ere this temperature is reached all 
gases pass to the liquid or solid condition and gaseous ex¬ 
pansion ceases. It is also well known that as we ascend 
and approach vacant space, the temperature of the air 
falls and at a comparatively moderate elevation we reach 
the line of perpetual snow. How far we would have to 
go beyond this ere we reached the region at which the 
gases of our atmosphere would become liquid has not 
been determined that I know of, but that it lies wdthin 
moderate limits is more than probable. At that point the 


of Design in the Creation. 


73 


air, if it had escaped to a distance from the earth, would 
become liquid or solid and gravity would so far overcome 
the tendency to motion away from the earth that the 
limit of gaseous expansion in the outer bounds of our at¬ 
mosphere could not lie at a very great distance from the 
surface of the earth. This is a point which is too often 
overlooked in speculations upon this subject, but its im¬ 
portance is very great. Daniels, referring to the kinetic 
theory of gases, says: ‘ 4 This opens up to us an extraordi¬ 
nary view of the nature of our atmosphere. We must, 
though the process cannot be rapid, for each particle ris¬ 
ing from the earth is retarded by gravity and falls back 
towards the earth, constantly be losing particles of nitro¬ 
gen and oxygen as we are dragged through space, and we 
may constantly be picking up new ones. If we entered 
regions of space in which there were no particles fit to 
make up our losses, it would be an interesting question 
how short a time would suffice altogether to deprive us 
of our atmosphere. ********* The 
region of space through which the earth is at present 
traveling contains much benzene vapor with ethyl-hy¬ 
dride and other alcoholic derivatives. * ’ 

That the earth has in the past received slight additions 
to its mass through the fall of meteorites, etc., is well 
known but when we consider the low temperature of 
space it is very doubtful if either losses or additions of 
a gaseous nature have been sustained. And in any case 


74 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

the amount of such losses or additions, when compared 
with the mass of the atmosphere, must be negligible. It 
is therefore substantially true that the changes which 
have occurred in the quantity of matter which at various 
periods has formed our atmosphere have been due solely 
to changes in the temperature of the earth and to chem¬ 
ical action. This point we shall consider more fully in 
a future section. 


§ 10. The Composition of the Atmosphere and the 
Properties of the Several Components. 

Few persons have an adequate idea of the important 
part which the atmosphere has played and still plays 
in the economy of the world in which we live. We know 
that air is truly the breath of life; that when deprived 
of air we soon die and that when we are compelled to 
breathe impure air we become languid and oppressed 
with headache and other disagreeable feelings, but we 
do not always realize that upon the air we depend not 
only for life and strength but for food by which these 
may be maintained, for it is easily proved that the great 
bulk of all animal and vegetable growth is derived pri¬ 
marily from the air acting in conjunction with the light 
of the sun. 


of Design in the Creation. 75 

Take one of the largest trees of the forest with all its 
branches, roots and leaves and burn it to ashes. A very 
small portion of the ash may be lost by being carried 
away by currents of air, but even allowing for this the 
ashes which remain on the ground seem a very insignifi¬ 
cant residue for such a large mass of timber. And yet 
this trifling heap of ashes is all that that hugh tree ob¬ 
tained from the soil; the great bulk which towered to¬ 
wards the heavens was derived from air and water and 
chiefly from air. 

Even man himself derives the material parts of his 
frame chiefly, though indirectly, from the air and al¬ 
though it may be truly said that man is made of the dust 
of the earth, we must bear in mind that the atmosphere 
is part of the globe, and that when we consign the remains 
of our friends to their mother earth—“dust to dust and 
ashes to ashes”— the air claims its full share of that 
which is to “melt into the elements.” When a human 
body is cremated, the small urnful of ashes that we carry 
away from the crematory is all that was derived, directly 
or indirectly, from the soil. The vastly greater part 
came from the air through the agency of vegetation and 
to air it has returned. 

In discussing the mechanical and physical characteris¬ 
tics of the atmosphere, we were obliged to deal with it 
as a whole, that is, to say, as a homogeneous gas or air of 
uniform composition in every part. But now that we 


j 6 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

come to consider the air in its more intimate relations 
to animal and vegetable life we find that it is composed 
of several gases, and that each of these has properties 
very different from the others with which it is associated. 
The principal gases and the proportions in which they 
exist in 1,000 volumes of air are given in the following 
table: 


COMPOSITION OF AIR. 

Volumes per 1,000. 

Nitrogen (containing about 1 per cent, of Argon 


and other new elements). 779.0600 

Oxygen . 206.5940 

Aqueous Vapour. 14.0000 

Carbonic Acid. 0.3360 

Ammonia . 0.0080 

Ozone . 0.0015 

Nitric Acid . 0.0005 


1000.0000 

That minute quantities of other substances are present 
in the air is very certain but the amounts are exceedingly 
small, and the presence of many of them can be detected 
only by exposing delicate tests to the action of the air 
for a considerable time. Thus if we expose a watery mix¬ 
ture of the substance known as white lead (which con¬ 
sists chiefly of the carbonate of the metal and is largely 
used for paint) to the air for some time, it gradually be- 










of Design in the Creation. 


77 

comes dark, showing that it has absorbed sulphur (prob¬ 
ably present in the form of sulphide of hydrogen) and 
become a sulphide. The same thing happens in the case 
of silver; it is difficult to keep either solid or plated sil¬ 
verware from becoming dark owing to the presence of 
sulphur in the atmosphere even in cases where there is 
no chance of accidental contamination from stoves or il¬ 
luminating gas. It is true that some of this darkening 
effect may be due to ozone but the blackening takes place 
rapidly in cities when no ozone is present. Gases of var¬ 
ious kinds are constantly being given off by the changes 
of organic matter, by the slow decomposition of minerals, 
and by various operations in the arts, but chiefly by the 
combustion of coal, natural gas, etc. It is estimated that 
at least half a million tons of sulphur dioxide (sulphurous 
acid) are annually produced and set free in London alone 
by the combustion of coal but so enormous is the amount 
of matter in the atmosphere that this addition is not no¬ 
ticed except by its action on buildings and other objects 
upon which, after some time, it exerts a corrosive action. 
Even the annual addition of the three thousand millions 
of tons of carbonic acid that are produced by the com¬ 
bustion of fuel of various kinds would not sensibly affect 
the purity of the atmosphere in less than 50,000 years, 
even if there were no counteracting and purifying agen¬ 
cies at work. 


78 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

We may therefore safely confine our attention to the 
components named in the foregoing table, the chief char¬ 
acteristics of each being as follows : 

Nitrogen. 

A glance at the table given on a preceding page shows 
that the nitrogen present in the atmosphere amounts to 
nearly four times the quantity of all the other constitu¬ 
ents put together, and although the general impression in 
regard to this element is that it serves merely to dilute 
the more energetic constituents of the air, we shall find 
on more careful examination that it has other and very 
important uses besides that of increasing the mere bulk of 
the atmosphere and modifying the activity of the other 
components. 

When in the free state, that is to say, when existing in 
the gaseous form, uncombined with any other element, 
nitrogen is one of the most inactive elements known to 
chemists. Under ordinary conditions it does not burn 
and from this it follows conversely, that it does not sup¬ 
port combustion. This property, or perhaps we might 
rather say lack of property, gives it a peculiar value in its 
office of diluting the more active element, oxygen, which 
comes next to it in quantity. Indeed, nitrogen seems to 
occupy among gases a position similar to that occupied 
by water amongst liquids; it is perfectly neutral, neither 
acid or alkaline; it does not act injuriously upon other 
substances because it does not, under ordinary condi- 


of Design in the Creation. 79 

tions, combine directly with any other element, although 
by suitable means it may be united with very 
many of them—oxygen, hydrogen, gold, silver, mercury, 
iron, etc., etc., but all the compounds are very unstable, 
so unstable indeed that it is amongst them that we find 
our most powerful explosives and our most deadly poi¬ 
sons. As Professor George Wilson wrote in his paper on 
Chemical Final Causes : 11 The compounds which it forms 
are amongst the most remarkable which the chemist 
knows; acids the most potent, such as nitric acid; alka¬ 
lies the most powerful, of which ammonia is one among 
a multitude; dyes the most useful, such as indigo; medi¬ 
cines the most energetic, such as quinine; poisons the most 
deadly, such as prussic acid and strychnia; besides end¬ 
less other substances, belonging to every category of 
chemical compounds.” 

When the elementary character of nitrogen was first 
established by Lavoisier, he gave it the name of azotes 
because animals which were forced to breathe it in a pure 
state were soon deprived of life—the word azote signify¬ 
ing absence of life. This fatal effect, however, was not 
due to any poisonous quality in the nitrogen, but simply 
to the fact that the animal was deprived of oxygen in the 
same manner that if would have been if immersed in 
w r ater, and we know that nitrogen is an essential constitu¬ 
ent of all animals and vegetables, and that it enters as a 
necessary element into the composition of protoplasm 
and of almost all those compounds which take an active 


8o 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


part in what may be called vital activities. It is absent 
from starch, sugar and some similar compounds, but 
owing to the wonderful facility with which changes may 
be affected in all the compounds into which it enters, it 
seems to perform a part which could be taken by no other 
element. Indeed, from some points of view, nitrogen 
rather than carbon might be considered the life-giving 
element, and there is no living plant or animal that does 
not contain it. Readers of Haeckel must have observed 
that to carbon he attributes almost supernatural qualities, 
his so-called ‘ ‘ carbon theory ’ ’ being thus formulated: 

“The peculiar, chemico-physicial properties of car¬ 
bon—especially the fluidity and the facility of decom¬ 
position of the most elaborate albuminoid compounds 
of carbon—are the sole and the mechanical causes of the 
specific phenomena of movement, which distinguish or¬ 
ganic from inorganic substances and which are called 
life in the usual sense of the word. Although this ‘car¬ 
bon-theory’ is warmly disputed in some quarters, no bet¬ 
ter monistic theory has yet appeared to replace it.” 
Riddle of the Universe, p. 91. 

And his translator, in the index to The Riddle, actually 
ascribes to carbon the position of ‘ ‘ creator! ’ ’ But while 
there may be no better ‘ ‘ monistic ’ ’ theory to replace this 
so-called ‘ ‘ carbon-theory, ’ ’ there may be other and much 
better theories. That the albuminoid compounds owe 
their “fluidity and facility of decomposition” to canbon 
is very doubtful; it is far more probable that this quality 


of Design in the Creation. 81 

is derived from the nitrogen which they contain. For 
example, carbonic acid is decomposed in the plant only 
in the presence of a nitrogenous compound (chlorophyl 
etc.) and the compounds of carbon itself are anything but 
unstable. Starch and sugar, even in solution, do not 
change until nitrogenous bodies, such as bacteria, have 
been introduced and then the change proceeds rapidly. 
Haeckel's so-called “carbon-theory’' is, to say the least, 
very far from being thoroughly established. 

Oxygen. 

While nitrogen, owing to the great quantity in which 
it exists in the atmosphere, is the efficient agent in all 
phenomena of a purely physical or mechanical character, 
oxygen is the chief agent in those phenomena which are 
due to chemical action, such as fires, the rusting of me¬ 
tals, the breathing of animals etc. for, unlike nitrogen, 
it is one of the most active elements known to the 
chemist. It combines readily with almost all the other 
elements and in most cases it does not require much 
coaxing to bring this union about. Indeed it is only with 
the greatest difficulty that some of the elements can be 
protected from its attacks. 

Potassium, sodium and metals of that class have to be 
kept submerged in naphtha or some similar fluid to keep 
them from oxidating or rusting even at ordinary tem¬ 
peratures and with other elements, such as carbon, sul¬ 
phur, hydrogen etc. it requires but a comparatively slight 


82 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


elevation of temperature to cause a most energetic com¬ 
bination which in such cases gives rise to what is fa¬ 
miliarly known as combustion or fire. Phosphorus re¬ 
quires to be kept under water to prevent a slow oxidation 
which would soon raise the temperature to the kindling 
point or point of ignition as it is technically called, and 
then a most energetic combustion would ensue. 

The rusting of iron is a well known phenomenon 
which causes constant trouble in daily life. It requires 
the utmost care and watchfulness to prevent our iron and 
steel implements and vessels from being injured by rust, 
or, in other words, from forming that combination with 
oxygen which iron so very readily does under certain 
conditions. It is true that in perfectly dry air iron or 
steel will remain bright for a long time, but the least 
traces of moisture and carbonic acid enable the oxygen 
to attack the best steel and to reduce it from a hard, com¬ 
pact block, capable of taking a keen and durable edge, to 
the condition of a friable mass which may be crumbled 
between the fingers. And although the conditions under 
which the process of rusting occurs are rather complicat¬ 
ed, there is no doubt as to the physical eagerness with 
which iron and oxygen attract each other. Indeed so 
strong is this attraction that if pure iron be reduced to a 
powder sufficiently fine and loose, it requires no heat¬ 
ing to make it burn; it takes fire at once when brought 
into contact with air and burns with an energy and bril¬ 
liancy that few persons would think possible. And after 


of Design in the Creation. 


83 


they have become united the oxygen maintains the un¬ 
ion with a firmness which makes it very difficult to 
effect a separation. It was a long time before men learn¬ 
ed how to break up this union and obtain the pure metal 
in a condition fitted for the making of tools and weapons. 
The stone age had been long past and men were fully 
acquainted with the use of bronze for weapons and of 
gold and silver for ornaments before they had learned 
how to divorce iron from oxygen and set the metal free. 

Oxygen is one of the most universally distributed of 
all the chemical elements. Of every nine tons of the wa¬ 
ter of our oceans, lakes and rivers, eight tons are oxygen 
and of the solid globe it is estimated by the best authori¬ 
ties (Sir Henry E. Roscoe and others) that it forms 
nearly one-half the weight, a fact which is generally a 
surprise to most persons when their attention is first 
called to it. The limestones and marbles which build up 
our mountains contain 40 per cent, of oxygen; clay con¬ 
tains over 53 per cent, and the rocks and stones with 
which our streets are paved, contain a very large per cent- 
age of this gas, so that large as is the entire amount of 
oxygen present in the atmosphere it is but a mere trifle 
when compared with the quantity which in combination 
with metallic and other bases, goes to form the substance 
of the solid earth. All this gas is, however, locked up 
in compounds which hold it firmly in the form of liquids 
and solids and it must therefore be obvious that a very 
slight increase in the amount of calcium, magnesium, 


8 4 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


aluminium, iron and other metals and bases which in com¬ 
bination with oxygen now go to make up the mass of the 
earth, would lock up every atom of oxygen and leave us 
with an atmosphere entirely destitute of that essential ele¬ 
ment. This is a point to which we shall have occasion to 
recur in a subsequent section. 

The oxygen with which we are familiar and which 
forms the breath of our life, exists in a greatly diluted 
condition—only one part of oxygen to four of an inert 
gas—and yet every day we have evidence of the tremend¬ 
ous effects to which its chemical combination with com¬ 
bustible matter gives rise. The great fires of London, 
New York, Chicago, Boston and other places are fearful 
examples of the energy exhibited by this process of com¬ 
bination and when it once gets under strong headway 
man seems powerless to check it. When fire once starts 
in one of our great forests the mountains become roar¬ 
ing furnaces and the monarchs of the woods that perhaps 
have taken centuries to reach their present size and 
height, melt into ashes in a few seconds. 

But this energetic activity, intense though it un¬ 
doubtedly is, sinks into insignificance when compared 
with that which is exhibited on a minute scale in the 
laboratory when pure oxygen is used to support com¬ 
bustion. A splinter of green wood which has been 
ignited and the flame blown out, if left to itself will 
soon become extinguished and cold, but if, while it re¬ 
tains the least spark of fire, it be plunged into pure 


of Design in the Creation. 


«5 


oxygen, it immediately bursts into the most vivid com¬ 
bustion. Common iron, if heated a little above a red 
heat, will, when immersed in pure oxygen, burn more 
readily than charcoal in the open air. If a stream of 
oxygen be thrown on a block of charcoal to which the 
slightest spark of fire adheres there will be formed a 
small furnace in which platinum and many other re¬ 
fractory substances melt “as easily as does wax in the 
flame of a candle” to use the words of an old chemist. 
And if a small piece of iron, either cast or wrought, be 
placed in this furnace it melts in a few seconds and 
then burns fiercely, throwing out abundance of sparks 
which form one of the most dazzling and striking 
spectacles of the chemist’s lecture table. 

In any combustion which is carried on in the air, the 
heating power of the oxygen is lessened not only by the 
fact that it is present in greatly diminished quantity, but 
also by the loss of the heat which is imparted to the 
inert nitrogen. The latter exerts, therefore, a directly 
cooling action and consequently those who are familiar 
with the action of oxygen only as it is exhibited in the 
ordinary effects produced by air, have no idea of the 
intensity of action which would be produced by the pure 
gas. This is the element which, in its diluted condition, 
passes into our system and consumes the waste matter of 
our bodies, burning up the effete materials and thereby 
giving rise to that genial warmth which is essential to 
life. But how would it be if the air we breathe were. 


S6 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


greatly richer or poorer in this element ? This is a point 
to which we shall recur presently. 

Aqueous Vapor. 

While the other important constituents of the at¬ 
mosphere are found in pretty constant proportions, the 
amount of moisture that happens to be present varies 
from day to day, or perhaps we should rather say from 
hour to hour, and it appears to exist in a state of solu¬ 
tion in the other gases rather than as a gaseous addition 
to their bulk. This is largely due to the fact that the 
temperature all over the earth is greatly below the point 
at which water becomes a permanent gas or true steam 
under ordinary pressure, or even in a vacuum, but if dry 
air be brought into contact with a moist surface it at 
once absorbs the aqueous vapor to an amount depending 
upon the length of the exposure and the temperature 
of the air. Under ordinary circumstances it is seldom 
that this process goes so far as to saturate the air with 
moisture or in other words, to cause the air to take 
up as much moisture as it can hold. The amount of 
aqueous vapor thus held in solution is expressed in com¬ 
mon language by the “degree of humidity’’ in the air 
and we all know how this varies. 

The moisture of the air plays a most important part 
in the changes which are continually going on around 
us. By its mere mechanical action, falling on mountain 
tops and collecting into brooks and rivers which rush 


of Design in the Creation. 


87 


along, often with tremendous force, it wears down the 
hills and fills up lakes and valleys, converting water- 
covered surfaces first into swamps and bogs and then 
into fertile meadows. In addition to this it literally 
washes the air and frees it from many of those acciden¬ 
tal impurities which arise from volcanic action, from 
the decay of animal and vegetable matter and even from 
the changes to which minerals are subject. We all know 
how soluble carbonic acid is in water; the common siph¬ 
on bottle is an illustration of this, and in consequence 
of this solubility every drop of dew or of rain contains 
more or. less of this gas so that every shower carries 
it and other matter either into the soil or into the ocean. 
In the case of that portion which falls upon the soil, 
the dissolved gases exert an action which tends to com¬ 
pensate for the injurious results produced by the re¬ 
moval of mineral plantfood from the localities in which 
the plants are grown. Those who have read Victor Hu¬ 
go’s works cannot fail to remember his graphic account 
of the immense quantity of valuable matter which is dis¬ 
charged daily from the sewers of Paris, poured into the 
Seine, carried to the Atlantic Ocean and lost so far as 
utility to man is concerned. That which is true of Paris 
is true of all other large cities, and the manurial value of 
the material which is thus continually taken from the 
land and buried in the depths of the ocean is many thou¬ 
sands of times greater than that of all the commercial 
manures in market, great as that industry is. It is well 


88 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


known that the inorganic elements required by plants 
are present in sufficient quantity in most soils, the dif¬ 
ficulty being that they are not available because they 
are locked up in compounds which the plants are un¬ 
able to decompose with sufficient rapidity. The car¬ 
bonic acid, sulphurous acid and other gases carried down 
by the rain tend to change this condition and to set the 
plantfood free and in addition, the ammonia and ni¬ 
trates that are carried down are the most valuable of 
fertilizers. The effect of all this was fully recognized 
long before chemistry explained the reason and the mode 
of action; every old farmer knows that to the soil a 
heavy fall of snow is equal to a dressing of manure. 

And even when rain and snow fall into the ocean they 
are not altogether wasted as Mr. Proctor seems to inti¬ 
mate in his Other Worlds than Ours, (page 78). Stand¬ 
ing on the seashore and watching a rainstorm or fall¬ 
ing flakes of snow, most people would look upon the 
water just sent down from the clouds very much as 
they would regard a cargo of coals going to Newcastle. 
But on close examination it will be found that here again 
we only come in contact with one of nature’s great cy¬ 
cles in which plantfood is brought from the four quar¬ 
ters of the globe and utilized in the building up of 
marine vegetation which in turn becomes the food of 
marine animals, and these again become the food of 
man either directly or as the fertilizers of his wheat 
fields. The amount of plant-food in the shape of car- 


of Design in the Creation. 89 

bonie acid, ammonia, nitrates, etc., which is thus wash¬ 
ed out of the atmosphere and carried into the depths 
of the ocean is so enormous that we can form but a 
very faint conception of the aggregate quantity. A 
consideration of this fact shows that the extent to which 
the products of the sea might be utilized is something 
of which, at present at least, mankind has no adequate 
idea. The harvest of the sea is practically inexhaus¬ 
tible but hitherto the utilization of this harvest for the 
renovation of the soil has been confined to a narrow 
strip along the shores of the ocean. 

Another very important effect produced by the pres¬ 
ence of moisture in the air is due to its power of pre¬ 
venting the radiation of heat from the earth. We all 
know that in the interior of glass-covered plant houses 
the temperature rises on cold but bright days when the 
sun is shining. The beams of the sun readily penetrate 
the glass and the heat is absorbed by the soil and other 
things in the house; these become warm and impart 
their heat to the air. But the radiant heat which they 
emit has not the power to escape through the glass and 
consequently the temperature in the house rises and 
sometimes on very cold but bright winter days, the ex¬ 
tent of this rise is very great, so great indeed as to 
threaten injury to growing plants. In the atmosphere 
aqueous vapor acts like the glass of the plant house; 
pure, dry air allows not only the beams of the sun to 
pass through it without being heated by them, but it 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


90 

also permits the radiant heat from the earth to pass out 
into space and thus the earth is cooled. Aqueous va¬ 
por, even though perfectly clear and transparent visual¬ 
ly, prevents the passage of these heat rays and acts as a 
blanket to the earth. Hence we find the curious fact 
that in very dry climates the nights may be intensely 
cold, especially towards morning, while the day temper¬ 
ature may be very high. 

Carbonic Acid. 

Unlike nitrogen and oxygen, which are elements, car¬ 
bonic acid is a compound and consists of 12 parts of 
carbon and 32 parts of oxygen in every 44 parts by 
weight. It is very heavy gas, being, bulk for bulk, more 
than one and a half times as heavy as common air. As 
a consequence of this it may be dipped up like water 
out of any vessel containing it and it may be poured 
from one vessel to another like a liquid. If poured into 
a light paper box placed m the scale-pan of a balance, 
it will cause the pan into which it is poured to descend 
even though the balance be far from delicate. The 
stream of gas poured out of a vessel will even cause a 
small wheel, like an over-shot water-wheel, to turn round 
rapidly, and as the falling stream of gas is quite in¬ 
visible, the experiment is a very striking one, and to the 
unitiated it appears something like magic. This great 
heaviness sometimes causes it to accumulate in old wells 
and mines although the law of the diffusion of gases 


of Design in the Creation. 91 

tends to carry it off and to replace it with atmospheric 
air as will be explained presently. No candle or fire 
can burn in an atmosphere of carbonic acid, and no 
animal can live in it. Hence the danger of descending 
into old pits or wells without previously testing the air 
in them by means of a burning candle. If the candle 
burns brightly there is no danger, but if it goes out or 
burns dimly, it will be certain death to descend. 

This gas is always produced whenever any of the ordi¬ 
nary kinds of fuel—coal, wood, petroleum, gas, gaso¬ 
line, peat, etc.—are burned and it is also given off con¬ 
stantly from the breathing apparatus of all animals. All 
animals obtain their strength and warmth from the 
food which they eat, and this food, which consists large¬ 
ly of carbon, is burned in their bodies as really and 
as effectually as is the coal in the fire box of the steam 
engine or the gas in the gas furnace, so that the quan¬ 
tity of carbonic acid gas which is daily poured into the 
air from all the animals in the world, from the tiniest 
insect to the ox, the elephant and the gigantic whale 
must be very great. 

The amount which is produced by the combustion of 
fuel of various kinds is also very large. The annual 
output of coal is now estimated at not less than 1,000 
millions of tons, all of which is consumed nearly as fast 
as it is taken from the mine. The amount of carbon 
present in coal varies from 57 to 97 per cent.—85 per 
cent, being probably a fair average. Each ton of this 


92 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


grade would produce 3.11 tons of carbonic acid so that 
the 1,000 millions of tons of coal would yield 3,110 
millions of tons of carbonic acid. To this must be added 
the carbonic acid derived from the combustion of wood, 
peat, petroleum, natural gas, etc., as well as from the 
decay of animal and vegetable matter. It is estimated 
that the carbonic acid produced daily in any one of 
the large breweries amounts to several tons. But after 
all, the entire aggregate from these various sources is but 
a small percentage of the total amount of carbonic acid 
which already exists in the atmosphere, for this amounts 
to over three billions (English notation), that is, 
3,000,000,000,000 of tons. And yet as may be seen from 
the table given on a previous page the proportion in 
which it exists in the atmosphere is only that of three 
or four parts of carbonic acid to 10,000 of air. 

Just as oxygen is the very breath of life to animals 
so carbonic acid is the breath of life to plants. With¬ 
out carbonic acid there could be no plant growth and 
it is equally certain that without plant-growth there 
could be no animal life. The two are inseparably con¬ 
nected and each serves as an opposite and compensating 
activity to the other. For we must remember that car¬ 
bon, which is a constituent of this gas, is an essential 
element of all animal and vegetable organisms since 
every plant and animal, without exception, contains 
more or less of it, and there is not an atom of carbon 
now forming part of any living thing that was not de- 


of Design in the Creation. 93 

rived, directly or indirectly, from the carbonic acid of 
the atmosphere by means of a wonderful process in 
which sunlight plays an important part, and which may 
be thus briefly described: 

During the growing season, all plants, from the lowly 
grasses to the stately forest trees, absorb carbonic acid 
from the air through those superficial cells which con¬ 
tain chlorophyl and w r hich at the same time are ex¬ 
posed to sunlight. It was at one time held that the 
stomata or pores which are found so plentifully in the 
leaves were the chief agents in this absorption, but this 
has been disproved. Since the plant cells which contain 
chlorophyl are found almost wholly in the leaves, the 
leaves may be regarded as the lungs of the plant, and if 
we consider the great extent of surface which is exposed 
by the leaves of any large tree or by the blades of corn 
or wheat in a field of growing grain we may form some 
faint idea of the immense absorbing power of an acre of 
plants and of the large amount of carbonic acid which 
may thus be gathered even from breezes which contain 
only the minute percentage of this gas that is found 
in the atmosphere. It is seldom that the air is entirely 
without motion and the quivering leaves and waving 
fields of grain and meadows testify to the continual 
changes whereby fresh portions of air are brought into 
intimate contact with plant surfaces and made to give 
up that aerial food upon which the life of the plant de¬ 
pends. 


94 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


Under the influence of sunlight acting upon the 
chlorophyl or green coloring matter of the plant, the 
carbonic acid is decomposed, the carbon going to form 
other compounds which increase the bulk of the plant 
and enable it to lay up stores of such materials as 
starch, sugar and nitrogenous compounds which after¬ 
wards serve as food for animals. The oxygen which was 
combined with the carbon is thrown off and when thus 
newly generated, or, as chemists say, when in the nascent 
state, its action is much more energetic than that of oxy¬ 
gen in what is called the free state. An explanation 
of this curious fact would be rather too technical for 
these pages, but every housekeeper and laundress is fa¬ 
miliar with the fact that a clean grass plot, not too 
closely mown, has a bleaching power vastly greater than 
that of the ordinary currents of air which circulate 
amongst clothes that are hung on a clothes line. Henee 
also the advantage of hanging clothes on hedges and 
bushes; the fresh or nascent oxygen from the leaves 
soon makes the linen white. Shakespeare was evidently 
familiar with this fact when he made Autolycus, that 
'‘snapper-up of unconsidered triflesV in “The Winter’s 
Tale,” sing of 

"The white sheet bleaching on the hedge.” 

The cycle through which animal and vegetable actions 
and reactions pass and repass is one that can be very 
easily followed and as it is one of the most beautiful 


of Design in the Creation. 95 

in nature and intimately connected with our main argu¬ 
ment, it may not be out of place to briefly recapitulate 
the most prominent points. 

All animals derive their sustenance directly or indi¬ 
rectly from the vegetable kingdom for while the lion, 
the tiger and even man himself, to a certain extent, feed 
upon other animals, these other animals are almost all 
vegetable feeders. No animal derives any part of its 
support directly from the mineral kingdom; all animals 
live upon plants, directly or indirectly, and the plants 
upon which they feed are burned in the animal organ¬ 
ization as effectually and as really as if they were con¬ 
sumed in a furnace, the resulting carbonic acid being 
poured forth from the lungs just as the products of 
ordinary combustion are poured forth from our chim¬ 
neys. From this combustion and destruction of organic 
compounds the animal derives its physical energy and 
vigor as directly as the steam engine derives its power 
from the burning of coal in its firebox. Without food 
there can be no animal energy and every time we strike 
a blow or walk a step, or even think a thought, some of 
our tissues are worn out and either cast out of the sys¬ 
tem by excretion or they are burned up and exhaled by 
the lungs, and in either case, in the healthy organism, 
they are replaced by new material. 

During the summer time this worn out and burned 
up matter from our own and other bodies passes into 
the air, chiefly as carbonic acid and is absorbed by our 


96 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

wheat fields, our forests and our gardens where, after 
being decomposed and assimilated by plants, it is again 
converted into food-material, timber, fruits and flow¬ 
ers. In the winter time, when the leaves are gone and 
the fields and gardens are bare, the foul gases from our 
furnaces and the vitiated air of our homes and our as¬ 
sembly rooms are wafted to tropical regions where, un¬ 
der the influence of the sun, which is the great source 
of terrestrial physical energy and might well be called 
the physical vice-gerent of God upon earth, they are 
converted into vigorous plant growth, some of which 
is returned to us as luscious fruits. So that next sea¬ 
son the orange which you eat at breakfast may contain 
in its tissues some of the constituents of the identical 
noxious vapors which were poured forth from the smoke¬ 
stack of the steamer which carried you across the At¬ 
lantic. 

And in this way the organic matter of our globe 
moves on in a never-ending series of cycles with a cer¬ 
tainty of action and a delicacy of adjustment which, in 
its appeal to our sense of beauty and harmony, is not 
exceeded by any feature of the starry heavens. 

Ozone. 

Those who have stood beside an electrical machine 
when it was in action cannot have failed to observe the 
peculiarly penetrating odor to which the working of the 
machine gave rise. This was at first thought to be the 


of Design in the Creation. 97 

odor of electricity itself, but more recently it has been 
found to be due to a peculiar modification of the oxygen 
through which the electrical discharges pass. Like car¬ 
bon, phosphorus and some other elements, oxygen ap¬ 
pears in more forms than one. Thus phosphorus takes 
three distinct forms each one having different proper¬ 
ties but all being neither more nor less than pure phos¬ 
phorus. Carbon appears not only as charcoal, graph¬ 
ite, etc., but as the diamond and when a series of elec¬ 
trical discharges are passed through oxygen this gas 
undergoes a remarkable change which confers upon it 
new pow T ers and enables it to decompose compounds, 
such as iodide of potassium, upon which oxygen in the 
ordinary state has no effect whatever. 

Ozone destroys many kinds of organic matter espec¬ 
ially those products of decay which are found floating 
in the air and as might be expected, it is itself changed 
by the operation and is converted into common oxygen. 
As a consequence of this it is found that wherever there 
is much organic matter in the air there is very little 
ozone. This is apt to be the case in cities and therefore 
the air of cities is generally found to be free from ozone, 
while in the country and especially over fields of grow¬ 
ing grass, etc., the ozone is abundant. 

In this way ozone is one of the great purifiers of the 
atmosphere, a fact which we fully recognize in the fresh¬ 
ness and invigorating qualities of the air after a thun¬ 
derstorm. When it is present in excess it causes irrita- 


98 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

tion of the respiratory passages but in the quantity in 
which it usually occurs it is highly beneficial. 

Ammonia and Nitric Acid. 

These compounds exist in very small proportions in 
the air but they are very important sources of nitrogen 
to plants. They are washed out of the atmosphere and 
carried by the rains into the soil where they serve as 
plant food. Recent discoveries in regard to the action 
of nitrogen-fixing bacteria have thrown new light on 
the sources whence certain plants derive their supply 
of assimilable nitrogen and to those who already believe 
in the guidance of a Supreme Intelligence they furnish 
most interesting evidence of design and adaptation but 
they do not greatly affect the general argument which is 
the subject of this volume and therefore do not call for 
discussion here. 


§11. Is the Atmosphere a mere Mixture of the 
Components which form it, or are these 
United in Chemical Combination? 

There is a great difference between a chemical com¬ 
bination of any two or more elements and a mere me¬ 
chanical mixture of the same ingredients. A chemical 
combination generally results in an entire change of 


of Design in the Creation. 99 

properties; the resulting product rarely resembles any 
of its constituents and its relations to other substances 
are usually completely altered. Therefore, as we shall 
see hereafter, the question which has been placed at the 
head of this section is of very great importance in con¬ 
nection with the main question which it is the purpose 
of this book to discuss, viz: the presence or absence of 
design in the evolution of the atmosphere or, in other 
words, whether the proportions of the components which 
form our present atmosphere were regulated by chem¬ 
ical laws or by intelligent design. Consequently it may 
not be out of place to give here a few simple explana¬ 
tions of the terms element, chemical combination and 
mixture , even although such explanations may only be 
a repetition of those which are to be found in every 
primer of chemistry. 

By the term ‘‘element” chemists mean a substance 
which, so far as we know, is never produced in nature 
or in the chemist’s laboratory by combining or mixing 
other substances, and from which nothing can be ex¬ 
tracted except itself. Thus although men have tried for 
ages to make gold by combining other elements or by 
removing supposed impurities from the more common 
metals, they have never succeeded and neither have they 
been able to decompose gold or to extract from a mass 
of the pure metal, anything but gold. Gold is therefore 
held to be an element. The same is true of nitrogen. 
It may be combined with other elements so as to pro- 


100 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


duce substances which are entirely different in every 
respect both from the nitrogen itself and from the sub¬ 
stances with which it is combined, but when we decom¬ 
pose the resulting compounds we get back unchanged 
the exact quantity of nitrogen and of the other elements 
which were used in forming them. 

Of course it is quite possible that more powerful meth¬ 
ods of analysis may be discovered and that some of the 
substances which are now regarded as elements may be 
found to be compounds. This was the case with soda 
and potash which were at one time regarded as simple 
elementary substances, but which yielded to the voltaic 
battery in the hands of Sir Humphrey Davy and were 
found to be combinations of bright metals with oxygen. 
It has even been suggested that the various elements 
now recognized as such by chemists may all be mere 
modifications of one fundamental substance, and that 
if we only had the necessary appliances and understood 
the proper methods of using them, it would be possible 
to convert any given element into any other. Thus far, 
however, this is but a dream of which the realization 
does not seem very near though certain discoveries in 
regard to the radio-active bodies have given renewed 
hope in that direction. 

The number of the substances which have thus far 
resisted all efforts on the part of chemists to decompose 
them, and which have never been produced by the com¬ 
bination of other elements amounts to between 70 and 


of Design in the Creation. 


ioi 


80. These elements may be compared to the letters of 
the alphabet which by being arranged and combined in 
various ways form words and these words again form 
books. And in a like way the elements form various 
compounds and in the world around us these compounds 
are built up so as to form all the rocks, plants and ani¬ 
mals which appear upon the earth. 

As already stated, when two or more elements unite to 
form a chemical combination the resulting compound 
is generally very different from any of its components. 
Thus if we mix two volumes of hydrogen and one volume 
of oxygen and then apply a spark, the hydrogen and 
the oxygen combine to form water, a substance which is 
entirely different in its physical characteristics from 
either of the gases of which it is composed. Water is a 
liquid at ordinary temperatures; it changes to a gas 
only when raised to 212 deg. Fahr. under standard at¬ 
mospheric pressure and it becomes a hard and brittle 
solid at temperatures below 32 deg. On the other hand, 
the separate gases do not become liquid until the tem¬ 
perature is reduced to --314 deg. Fahr. (-192 deg. Cent.) 
and it requires a very much lower temperature to bring 
them to the solid condition. And as this is true of these 
gases whether they are operated upon separately or in 
a mixed condition, we see clearly that mere mixing causes 
no change while chemical combination completely alters 
the character of the resultant product. 


102 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


In the case of gases like hydrogen, oxygen or nitrogen 
we have no simple and easily operated means of separ¬ 
ating them after they are mixed except by operating 
upon them chemically. But if instead of gases we take 
two suitable powders, the grains of which are easily 
seen under a microscope, we may not only observe any 
difference of appearance produced by mixing them, but 
we may easily separate them by mechanical means. For 
the purpose of illustrating this principle sulphur and 
iron, both reduced to extremely fine powder, serve as 
well as any. If we mix thoroughly equal weights of 
these bodies we obtain a grayish yellow powder which 
to the unaided vision seems to be composed of one sub¬ 
stance. But if we examine it with a microscope of suit¬ 
able power we can easily detect each individual particle 
of the two components and it would be merely a matter 
of skill and patience to separate them. Or we might 
use a magnet and as the iron only would be attracted, 
the sulphur would be left behind after the few trials 
necessary to overcome the mechanical adhesion of the 
two powders. Another way would be to dissolve out 
the sulphur by means of disulphide of carbon which 
would not take up the iron. Then if the disulphide of 
carbon were evaporated, the sulphur would remain in the 
form of delicate crystals and if the operation were care¬ 
fully performed the entire amount of both iron and sul¬ 
phur might be recovered without loss and in a state of 
complete separation. 


of Design in the Creation. 103 

But if we pour the mixed powder into a test-tube and 
heat it carefully over a gas or spirit lamp, the sulphur 
and iron will soon begin to combine as will be shown by 
the glow which will pervade the entire mass and which 
is caused by the heat generated by the union of the two 
elements. When the mass has become cold it may be 
powdered in a mortar, but neither microscope, magnet 
nor disulphide of carbon will now enable us to separate 
the two constituents. 

But there is another curious and important fact which 
distinguishes chemical combinations from mere mixtures. 
Oxygen and hydrogen will mix in any proportion a?id 
though we may have an excess of one or of the other to 
many times the proportions in which they combine to 
form water, they will mix perfectly and every portion 
of the mixture will be found to contain the same propor¬ 
tions of the two gases as does every other part. But if 
we apply a spark, then, unless one of the gases is in such 
very great excess that combustion is interfered with, the 
gas of which there was too little will entirely disappear 
and the superfluous quantity of the other gas will re¬ 
main intact. And it is so in the case of every other 
element; each element will combine only in certain pro¬ 
portions and any excess that may be present will remain 
uncombined. The great importance of this principle in 
relation to our argument will be seen more fully when 
we come to consider the evolution of the atmosphere, 
and this therefore brings us to the question which has 


104 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

been placed at the head of this section: Is the atmos¬ 
phere a mere mixture of the several gases which compose 
it, or do these gases exist in a state of chemical combi¬ 
nation? To this question Sir Henry E. Roscoe, the 
famous chemist, gives the following answer in his Les¬ 
sons in Elementary Chemistry : 

“Respecting the chemical composition of the atmos¬ 
phere we have to remark, in the first place, that the air 
is a mixture, and not a chemical compound of its con¬ 
stituent gases, although as we shall see, these occur 
throughout the atmosphere in almost unvarying propor¬ 
tions. The grounds for coming to this conclusion are, 
first, that if we bring oxygen and nitrogen together in 
the proportions in which they are found in air, no ele¬ 
vation of temperature or alteration in bulk occurs (as 
is invariably the case when gases combine), and yet the 
mixture acts in every way like air; secondly, that the rel¬ 
ative quantities of the two gases present are not those 
of their combining weights, nor of any simple multiples 
of these weights; and thirdly, that although in general 
the proportions of the two gases are constant, yet in¬ 
stances not unfrequently occur in which this ratio is dif¬ 
ferent from the ordinary one. The most convincing 
proof, however, that air is not a chemical compound is 
derived from an experiment upon the solubility of air 
in water: when air is shaken up with a small quantity 
of water, some of the air is dissolved by the water; this 
dissolved air is easily expelled again from the water by 


of Design in the Creation. 


105 


boiling, and on analysis the expelled air is found to con¬ 
sist of oxygen and nitrogen in the relative proportions 
of 1 and 1.87. Had the air been a chemical compound, 
it would be impossible to decompose it by simply shaking 
it up with water; the compound would then have dis¬ 
solved as a whole, and, on examination of the air ex¬ 
pelled by boiling, it would have been found to consist of 
oxygen and nitrogen in the same proportion as in the 
original air, viz: as 1 to 4. This experiment shows, 
therefore, that the air is only a mixture, a larger pro¬ 
portion of oxygen being dissolved than corresponds to 
that contained in the atmosphere owing to this gas being 
more soluble in water than nitrogen.” 

Since the gases which compose the atmosphere are not 
in a state of chemical combination, it is evident that the 
proportions in which they exist could not have been reg¬ 
ulated by any known natural law or agency such as de¬ 
termines the composition of chemical compounds, and 
we are therefore compelled to conclude that this feature 
which, as we shall see hereafter, is of the utmost impor¬ 
tance, must have been determined either by “blind 
chance” or by the guidance of a self-conscious and far- 
seeing Intelligence. 


io6 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


§ 12 The Diffusion of Gases. 

Since the gases which compose the atmosphere are not 
in chemical combination with each other, but are merely 
mixed together and since the specific gravities of some 
of these gases differ very widely, it would be natural 
to suppose that they would arrange themselves in layers, 
the heaviest being at the bottom and the lightest at the 
top. For example: Bulk for bulk carbonic acid is 
more than one and a half times as heavy as common air; 
it may be dipped out of a vessel containing it as if it 
were so much water; it may be poured out as if it were 
a liquid and it may be poured from one vessel to another 
without difficulty and without requiring any special 
arrangement. It would therefore be reasonable to ex¬ 
pect that all the carbonic acid in the air would sink 
down to the earth and form a layer covering the en¬ 
tire surface of land and sea to a depth which would be 
determined by the quantity of this gas which is present 
in the entire atmosphere. 

If this were the case and if the entire surface of the 
globe were reduced to one level, both the land and ocean 
would be covered by a sea of carbonic acid to a depth 
of nearly 8 feet. But as one-third of the surface is 
raised above the level of the watery ocean and as this 
elevated land would displace a corresponding bulk of 


of Design in the Creation. 107 

gas, the layer of carbonic acid would probably be about 
10 or 11 feet deep at the sea level. All enclosed valleys, 
however, would be completely filled with it and the con¬ 
ditions to which such a state of things would give rise 
would be most extraordinary when compared with those 
which prevail at present. Animal life would be con¬ 
fined to the tops of hills, mountains and elevated pla¬ 
teaus and between these it would be difficult or perhaps 
impossible to find means of intercommunication. The 
only obvious methods of passing across these lagoons of 
carbonic acid would be by balloons or elevated cause¬ 
ways, and the latter could be constructed only under 
great difficulty if at all. Wagons on the level would be 
useless since both horses and men would be asphyxiated 
at the first plunge. No bird could swim upon the ocean 
or light upon the surface of any lake without incurring 
the certainty of instant death. Large ships, if the con¬ 
struction of these could be possible under such condi¬ 
tions, might carry their passengers across the ocean in 
occasional safety on their upper decks, provided these 
were high enough above the surface of the water, and 
provided also, that there were no high winds, not to say 
storms, for even an ordinary gale would be certain to 
carry waves of carbonic acid over the mast head of the 
“tallest admiral” that ever sailed the deep, and these 
waves would carry instant death to every living thing on 
board unless some ingenious means of protection could 
be devised. It is certain, however, that under such con- 


io8 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


ditions animal life, as we now know it, would be impos¬ 
sible; it would be destroyed in its very beginnings and 
there would be no chance for the evolution of man with 
his higher reasoning faculties and his wonderful inven¬ 
tive powers by which he might, if now suddenly brought 
under such conditions, be able to avoid or counteract 
their malign influences. 

The effect on vegetation would be equally remarkable. 
No plants could grow above what might be called the 
carbonic acid line because they could find no aerial food 
there, but below that there might be a rank and luxur¬ 
iant vegetation some of which might be carried above 
the line of demarcation, the supply of plant-food being 
gathered from the lower layer and carried up in the 
sap. Even this is doubtful, but there certainly would 
be no tall trees shooting up to a height of three or four 
hundred feet; no towering Sequoias or Eucalypti. No 
bird could make its nest in the thickets produced under 
such circumstances, and the great bulk of the vegetation 
would be useless as food for animals because any attempt 
to feed upon it in the way that the horse and the cow 
graze would be to incur certain death. A very large pro¬ 
portion of the entire surface of the globe would be reduc¬ 
ed to the condition of the deadly Upas Valley. 

Fortunately for us we do not have to face conditions 
which have just been described. Instead of arranging 
themselves in the order of their specific gravity or heav¬ 
iness, gases follow a curious law T (the law of diffusion) 


of Design in the Creation. 


109 


and distribute themselves freely through any space or 
vessel in which they may be contained, seemingly with¬ 
out any regard to the presence of other gases. This is 
a very important feature in the constitution of the at¬ 
mosphere and may be best explained by describing a 
few illustrative experiments. 

If we take two bottles, one filled with a light gas and 
the other with a heavy gas (say hydrogen and carbonic 
acid) and place them one over the other with their 
mouths in air-tight contact, the bottle containing the 
light gas being uppermost, the gases will pass from one 
bottle to the other and in a short time it will be found 
that they are equally distributed in both bottles. Here 
the light gas passes downward into the heavy gas and 
the heavy gas passes upward into the light gas utterly 
regardless of the difference in their specific gravities. 

This curious phenomenon occurs even when the two 
bottles are connected only by a slender tube as shown 
in the illustration Figure 1. Here we have the lower 
bottle containing carbonic acid and the upper one con¬ 
taining hydrogen, the two bottles being connected by 
the tube A which may be of any reasonable length. As 
soon as the vessels have been arranged in this way, the 
hydrogen will begin to pass down the tube and the car¬ 
bonic acid to pass up and after the lapse of a compara¬ 
tively short time the two gases will be equally 
distributed in the two bottles. 


IIO 



Mg. 7 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 




Illustrating Diffusion of Gases 











































of Design in the Creation. 


i 11 


This diffusion takes place not only from open mouth¬ 
ed bottles and through tubes but through such porous 
media as plaster of paris, common mortar, unglazed pot¬ 
tery and similar substances and the force with which 
each gas tends to expand and diffuse through space en¬ 
ables us to illustrate the principle by some very inter¬ 
esting experiments, especially since all gases do not dif¬ 
fuse with the same rapidity, the lighter gases passing 
through porous media more rapidly than the heavier 
ones. 

In figure 2 is shown a glass tube A. about 2 inches in 
diameter and from 18 to 24 inches in length. The upper 
end of this tube has been ground flat so that it may be 
closed air-tight by means of a piece of plateglass and 
near the top is a plug of plaster of paris one-half to 
three-quarters of an inch thick and quite dry. The up¬ 
per end being closed by the glass plate, the tube is filled 
with hydrogen by displacement as it is called, the method 
being as follows: A rubber tube attached to the hydro¬ 
gen generator or gas-holder is pushed up some distance 
into the tube A. and held there for a few minutes; the 
hydrogen will then ascend to the upper part of the tube 
and press down the air until the tube is completely fill¬ 
ed with the gas, provided the hydrogen is supplied more 
rapidly than it can escape at the bottom by diffusion 
and to effect this does not require apparatus of any 
great power. When filled with hydrogen the tube A. is 
set upright in a glass dish containing water as shown 


112 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


in the engraving. On removing the glass plate P, which 
covers the upper end of A, the hydrogen will pass out 
through the plaster plug and air will pass in but as the 
rapidity with which the hydrogen passes out is greater 
than that with which the air passes in, a slight vacuum 
is formed and the water will rise to fill it. This rise 
is quite rapid, and if the water be colored with a little 
red ink the effect is very striking. 

The explanation of this is that the rapidity with which 
gases diffuse and pass through porous media is in some 
degree proportioned to their lightness; hydrogen being 
the lighter of the two gases diffuses much more rapidly 
than air and consequently a partial vacuum is formed 
by its escape. Carbonic acid being much heavier than 
air, passes through the porous medium at a much slower 
rate and if the tube A. had been filled with this gas in¬ 
stead of hydrogen, the air would have passed into the 
tube more rapidly than the carbonic acid could have 
passed out, and instead of the colored liquid rising in 
the tube, bubbles of gas would have passed out at the 
lower end. 

This curious fact enables us to arrange the following 
interesting and apparently paradoxical experiment: 

Procure a common glass bottle holding from 1 1-2 to 2 
quarts and cut off the bottom by means of a red-hot 
poker, directions for doing which may be found in any 
work on laboratory technics. After having cut off the 
bottom, file off the sharp edges so that there may be 


of Design in the Creation. i 13 

no danger of cutting the hands. Then cut a circular 
piece of wood or thick pasteboard and fit it into the bot¬ 
tle midway between the shoulder and the bottom. The 
wooden disc should be slightly smaller than the diam¬ 
eter of the bottle and then, when covered with a few 
thicknesses of soft paper it may be made to fit so close : 
ly at every point that it will not allow liquid plaster 
to flow past its edges. The disc should have several 
strings attached to it so that it may be easily pulled out 
after the plaster has become quite hard. Then stand 
the bottle upright on a board or table with the open end 
down and make a paper funnel which will pass through 
the neck of the bottle and reach nearly to the wooden 
disc. Now take some plaster of paris mixed with water 
as for taking casts, and pour it down the funnel until 
a layer three-quarters of an inch thick lies evenly all 
over the disc. The paper funnel enables us to do this 
without soiling the inside of the bottle. Allow plenty 
of time for the plaster to become quite hard and dry; 
if an attempt be made too soon to pull out the wooden 
disc, the plaster diaphragm may be broken. Remove any 
paper that may adhere to the plaster and avoid the 
slightest taint of grease as this would stop the pores 
of the plaster and prevent the gas from passing through. 

In the neck of the bottle insert a glass tube about half 
an inch in diameter and from 12 to 18 inches loug. This 
may be passed airtight through a cork or rubber stop¬ 
per or it may be fastened in with plaster of paris or any 
other suitable cement. 


114 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

The bottle thus arranged may be supported as in Fig. 
3 over a glass dish containing some colored water. An 
ordinary retort stand makes a good support. The water 
in the dish and that in the tube C. should be brought 
to the same level which is easily done by passing a small 
rubber tube through the water and up the glass tube. 
This allows air to escape or to enter as may be necessary. 

If we now fill the upper part (formerly the bottom) 
of the bottle A. with carbonic acid, we shall find that 
the water will rise in the glass tube. This singular re¬ 
sult is caused by the air passing up through the plaster 
diaphragm more rapidly than the heavy carbonic acid 
passes down and thus we have the paradoxical result 
of the water rising owing to the pressure of the outside 
air when a gas that is much heavier than air is placed 
above it and is apparently free to press it down. 

But although gases, owing to this diffusive power, 
distribute themselves with great force, the process is 
comparatively slow and in many cases a gas may be gen¬ 
erated far more rapidly than it is carried off. This is 
seen in crowded assemblyrooms where the carbonic acid 
is often present greatly in excess of the normal propor¬ 
tion found in the open air, and because of this fact the 
chemist is enabled to collect hydrogen and carbonic acid 
in open vessels by the method known as displacement. 
In some parts of the world, especially in volcanic reg¬ 
ions, carbonic acid escapes from the earth in enormous 
quantities and sometimes accumulates in pits, caves and 


of Design in the Creation. i i 5 

even in valleys to an extent which renders it fatal to any 
animal that enters such a place. The famous Grotto 
del Cane, in Italy, is a cave of this kind and the Upas 
Valley in the Island of Java is another example. This 
valley is about half a mile in circumference and 35 feet 
deep with rising ground all round it. Loudon, the fam¬ 
ous horticulturist, visited it and tells us that the bot¬ 
tom, which is quite smooth, is almost covered with the 
skeletons of human beings, tigers, pigs, deer, peacocks and 
all sorts of birds. These bones have been bleached quite 
white, probably by the sulphurous gases which are al¬ 
most always present in volcanic vapors, and which would 
account for the fact that there is no vegetation on the 
floor of the valley. As a general rule, however, these 
heavy gases soon diffuse and disappear unless the sup¬ 
ply is kept up. 

The principle of diffusion must have played an im¬ 
portant part in the evolution of the atmosphere, at least 
so far as the gaseous constituents of this planet were 
concerned. 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


i 16 


§ 13. The Evolution of the Atmosphere. 

Extended observations with the spectroscope show that 
those shining orbs which people space are composed of 
the same materials with which we are familiar in our 
terrestrial laboratories. In some stars, certain elements 
may be absent, or at least appear to be absent, because 
perhaps they are not present in quantity sufficient to 
give evidence of their existence, and we have reason to 
believe that there are a few elements which at present 
are unknown to us except through their spectroscopic 
effects. Of such elements helium at one time seemed 
to be an example; it was first discovered in the sun and 
registered as a new but unknown substance but was 
afterwards discovered in a rare mineral and is now given 
a place in the list of terrestrial elements. It is there¬ 
fore very certain that all the aggregations of matter in 
the visible universe have substantially the same chem¬ 
ical composition as those which form the solar system. 
In other words, the same kinds of matter, the same forms 
of physical energy and the same laws are found every¬ 
where. From this, however, it does not follow that all 
the stars, etc., are made up of the same proportions of 
the various elements; Sir Norman Lockyer who has de¬ 
voted years of successful study to this department of 


of Design in the Creation. i 17 

the “New Astronomy” tells us in his paper on Inorganic 
Evolution that “we have spectroscopically revealed the 
fact that there is considerable variation in the chemical 
constituents which visibly build up the stellar atmos¬ 
pheres,” a fact which proves that our solar system, 
and even each individual planet in that system, might 
easily have had a constitution very different from that 
which it is found to have and this without doing vio¬ 
lence to any known chemical or physical law. 

That the sun and all the planets at one time formed 
a simple aggregation of matter from which the solar 
system, as it now exists, was ultimately evolved, is the 
generally accepted belief of scientific men, whether they 
adopt the new meteoritic hypothesis or stick to the older 
nebular theory. From this it follows that in the course 
of the evolution of the solar system the earth, at some 
very remote period, assumed a separate existence, at 
which stage of its formation it consisted of a solid but 
very hot nucleus and an atmosphere which probably ex¬ 
tended as far as the orbit of the moon, some astronomers 
holding that it extended even further. Of the physical 
condition of the outer part or shell of this large aggre¬ 
gation of matter it is difficult to form a satisfactory 
opinion, but we do know that if the nucleus had a 
temperature anything like that assigned to it by Helm¬ 
holtz and others, a very large portion of the mass of the 
present crust of the earth must have existed as gas or at 
least in a form akin to vapor. 


118 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

According to Helmholtz, whose estimates have been 
generally accepted, the temperature of the earth was 
at one time at least as high as 2,000 deg. Cent. (3,632 
deg. Fahr.), a temperature at which platinum and many 
other refractory bodies melt and most chemical com¬ 
pounds suffer decomposition, that is to say, their com¬ 
ponents dissociate and exist in a free or uncombined 
state. As this is a point which may not be fully under¬ 
stood by the general reader, a few words of explana¬ 
tion may not be out of place. 

If we bring mercury and oxygen together at the ordi¬ 
nary temperature they do not combine or act upon each 
other. Pure mercury in the cistern of a mercurial bar¬ 
ometer will remain for years unaffected by the air to 
which it is freely exposed. But if we raise the temper¬ 
ature to about 570 deg. Fahr., which is a little below the 
boiling point of the metal, the mercury will combine 
with the oxygen of the air and form an oxide of a red 
color known as monoxide of mercury or red precipitate. 
And if we now raise the temperature a little higher, 
this newly formed compound will be decomposed and as 
products we again have pure mercury in vapor and pure 
oxygen as a gas. The latter experiment furnished one 
of the earliest methods of obtaining oxygen in a pure 
state. 

When the oxide of mercury is thus decomposed by 
heat the mercury and the oxygen are said to be dissoci¬ 
ated. 


of Design in the Creation. i 19 

This principle is constantly applied in the arts for 
preparing various kinds of material. For example, 
limestone, marble, oyster shells, etc., are composed of 
lime and carbonic acid; by exposing them to heat they 
are decomposed and we obtain quicklime or caustic lime 
such as is used for building, and the carbonic acid passes 
off into the atmosphere. In this case it does not re¬ 
quire a very high degree of heat to effect the decompo¬ 
sition but even water, which is a comparatively stable 
compound of oxygen and hydrogen, is decomposed when 
the temperature is raised to about 1,832 deg. Fahr. The 
hydrogen and oxygen which had formerly combined with 
great avidity, now separate and instead of forming wa¬ 
ter or watery vapor they exist as distinct gases. And it 
is a notable fact that when they thus dissociate or separ¬ 
ate, an amount of energy which is exactly equal to that 
which was developed by the combination of the gases 
disappears. We often hear of projects for obtaining 
heat by burning water and the idea which leads to these 
schemes is apparently this: that since water consists of 
two gases which give out a great deal of heat when they 
combine and as these gases may be again separated at a 
higher temperature, water might be used as fuel by sim¬ 
ply separating the gases and burning them over again. 
These schemers forget that it would require just as much 
energy (heat) to separate the gases as would be given 
out by them when they were again burned. 

From these well-established facts and principles we 


120 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


gather that in its early stages the atmosphere must have 
contained a great deal of the matter which now forms 
the solid crust of the earth and this matter must have 
existed in a condition very different from that with 
which we are familiar. Hydrogen and oxygen would 
hot exist as water but as separate gases, and no carbon¬ 
ates, sulphates or chlorides could resist the decompos¬ 
ing effect of the temperature of the early periods. As 
the earth cooled by radiation it would contract but this 
Very contraction would tend to maintain a high temper¬ 
ature. In addition to this, as the temperature fell the 
Various elements which had hitherto existed in a separate 
condition would combine with each other and in so doing 
would give out an enormous amount of heat. This would 
tend to greatly retard the cooling of the planet but in 
spite of all this the cooling would go on and the various 
elements would form unions with each other so that we 
would have an atmosphere of the most complex make¬ 
up. Instead of the clear, pure and perfectly neutral air 
of to-day the atmosphere of that period must have con¬ 
tained enormous quantities of corrosive acids which on 
further cooling would be precipitated as rain and fall¬ 
ing on the red-hot nucleus would be again converted into 
vapor and returned to the clouds in a long series of 
evaporations and condensations. 

The conditions under which the chemical and phy¬ 
sical changes that occurred during this long process 
were effected must have been, exceedingly complicated 


of Design in the Creation. 121 

and much of the data necessary to form a numerical 
estimate of the results are probably beyond our reach. 
One important factor, however, would be the enormous 
pressure to which the matter at the surface of the earth 
would be subjected. It is more than probable that for a 
long period there would be no well-defined earth-sur¬ 
face such as now marks the dividing line between air 
and land and between the watery ocean and its sandy or 
rocky bottom, nevertheless the pressure of what might 
properly be called the atmosphere must have been very 
great. Dr. Thomas Young, the famous physicist, cal¬ 
culated that in a mine which reached a depth of 48 
miles below the present surface, the pressure of the at¬ 
mosphere would be so great that if Mariotte’s law con¬ 
tinued in operation, air would have the density of 
quicksilver. Now it is well known that chemical com¬ 
bination and dissociation are greatly affected by pres¬ 
sure, a fact to which due weight is not always given. 
It is therefore more than likely that many of the com¬ 
pounds which under ordinary circumstances would be 
broken up at the high temperature then prevailing, 
would remain stable under the enormous pressure of 
the primeval atmosphere. Let us therefore endeavor to 
form some estimate of the amount of matter which the 
atmosphere of that early period must have contained 
and the consequent pressure which it must have ex¬ 
erted. 

Assuming that the temperature at the surface of the 


122 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


earth had fallen to a point at which the elements not 
only of water but of carbonates, sulphates, chlorides, etc., 
would remain in stable combination and that water itself 
would retain the liquid form though no doubt, at a tem¬ 
perature very far above its present boiling point, it is 
evident that the atmosphere of that day would contain 
all the nitrogen and oxygen which are now present, the 
oxygen, however, being partly in combination with all 
the carbon which now exists as coal, peat, petroleum, 
natural gas, etc., as well as that which is found in all 
the living plants and animals now existing on the earth. 
At the temperature which had previously existed, all 
this carbon as well as all the hydrogen found in organic 
matter, would have combined with the oxygen and form¬ 
ed carbonic acid and water and it is well known that all 
the free carbon which now' exists as coal, etc., has been 
derived from plants and must therefore have existed at 
one time in the form of carbonic acid. 

Up to this time it is not likely that the metallic bases 
(calcium, magnesium, iron, etc.) which are now' found 
combined with carbonic acid, had as yet formed that un¬ 
ion. These metals, in combination with oxygen, would 
have been drawn by gravitation to the solid nucleus long 
before the temperature of dissociation for carbonates 
had been passed, and it would only be after the carbonic 
acid had been washed out of the air by watery rain and 
brought into contact with bases w r hich w r ere capable of 
combining with it and holding it, that the atmosphere of 


of Design in the Creation. 123 

that early day would be freed from the enormous 
amount of carbonic acid which must at one time have 
been present. It is easily calculated that the carbonic 
acid in a bed of marble thirty feet thick would, if set 
free, double the weight of the superincumbent atmos¬ 
phere and when we take into consideration the enormous 
thickness and extent of some of the known beds of mar¬ 
ble, limestone, dolomite and other carbonates as well as 
the great quantity of carbonic acid which is now locked 
up in shell deposits and materials of that kind, it is eas¬ 
ily seen that prior to the removal of this gas, the atmos¬ 
phere must have been two or three hundred times its 
present quantity and the pressure must have been pro¬ 
portionately great. Another thing which would add 
greatly to the quantity of matter in the primeval atmos¬ 
phere would be the vastly greater quantity of aqueous 
vapor which would be dissolved by the air at the tem¬ 
perature then prevailing. 

A very large portion of the calcareous carbonates 
(limestones, marbles, etc.,) of to-day show that they at 
at one time formed part of living organisms but at the 
period now under consideration there could not have 
been any plants or animals. Not until the primeval 
atmosphere had been purified by a continual washing 
which carried down not only the more corrosive acids 
but the carbonic acid itself in great part, could plants 
and, far less, animals have existed. For although car¬ 
bonic acid is the very breath of life to plants and al- 


124 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


though an increase in the percentage which now exists 
in the air would add greatly to the vigor of present 
plant growth, it has been shown by several able experi¬ 
menters that an excess of carbonic acid is injurious to 
the plant and that in the pure gas, plants cannot live 
at all. The proportion best adapted to plant growth 
seems to be from 8 to 10 per cent, and something ap¬ 
proaching this was probably the ratio during the great 
coal periods, but in such an atmosphere none of the 
higher species of animals could live unless endowed with 
Constitutions very different from those which they now 
possess. As has been elsewhere stated, the proportion of 
carbonic acid now present in the atmosphere is only from 
3 to 4 parts in 10,000. 

At first, therefore, the purifying action must have 
been wholly chemical and physical; the carbonic acid 
would be carried down in solution and brought into 
contact with the various bases and would then remain 
in permanent union with them, and not until the pro¬ 
portion had been greatly reduced would plant life com¬ 
mence. As soon as plants made their appearance, how¬ 
ever, they themselves would tend still further to purify 
the atmosphere and prepare it for the advent of animals. 
The immense beds of coal which are found in all parts 
of the world testify to the enormous quantity of carbonic 
acid which was removed from the air, the carbon being 


of Design in the Creation. 


125 


separated by the action of the plants whose remains are 
now found buried as coal and the oxygen being set free 
for the use of animals. After animals made their ap¬ 
pearance, some of the lower forms would tend to lock up 
a great deal of the carbonic acid in their calcareous 
shells though much of this would be a mere transfer 
from solution in water to the solid material of the shell. 

At length the atmosphere would be brought to such a 
state of purity as would fit it for the reception of the 
higher animals including man himself. 

The attentive reader will readily see that so far as the 
purification of the air and the evolution of the present 
atmosphere is concerned, this long process, w r hich no 
doubt occupied many millions of years, was one of grad¬ 
ual sifting as it were, the least volatile elements being 
separated first by precipitation and drawn by gravita¬ 
tion to the primal nucleus. As previously stated, the com¬ 
pounds of all the elements are decomposed at tempera¬ 
tures sufficiently high and even the most refractory sub¬ 
stances such as carbon, silicon, etc., undoubtedly existed 
at one time as vapor in certain regions of the atmos¬ 
phere of the sun and of the earth. On the outer edge of 
the spheroidal shell which would thus be formed, there 
would be a continual battle between the cold of space 
and the heat of the central nucleus. When the vapors 
of carbon, platinum, iron and other substances whose 
melting and vaporizing temperatures are very high. 


£26 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


reached a certain distance from the nucleus they would be 
condensed and would fall down like the rain from our 
present clouds and as the cooling process continued some 
of them would form stable compounds with oxygen, 
chlorine or some other element. As the earth still further 
cooled, substances of a more volatile nature, such as sul¬ 
phuric acid, mercury, etc., would be precipitated but 
during all this process of purification the elements des¬ 
tined to form the future atmosphere would be present in 
the precise quantities and the exact proportions in which 
they were ultimately required. It is true that some of 
them, as oxygen and carbon, would exist in combination 
and the carbonic acid resulting from this combination 
would be greatly in excess of that which is now present. 
But the entire quantity and the exact proportions of the 
various materials which compose the globe must have 
been present in just such quantities and just such pro¬ 
portions as would leave the atmosphere with its present 
constitution after the decomposing and sifting process 
had been completed. It is just as if we had a bushel 
of beans, a quart of peas and a pint of clover seed mixed 
in one heap. By sifting the entire mass through sieves 
or riddles with meshes of the proper size, we could sep¬ 
arate all these different seeds, but unless there had been 
a pint of clover and a quart of peas (and an exact pint 
and an exact quart) in the original heap, we could never 
get out of it an exact pint of clover seed and an exact 


of Design in the Creation. 


127 


quart of peas. There is no process of sifting that can 
add one kernel or take away one grain; the sifting 
merely gives us the quantities of the original ingredients 
in a new form of arrangement. 

And this is precisely what the chemical and physical 
laws due to different temperatures accomplished; they 
sifted out and separated into solid globe, watery ocean 
and gaseous atmosphere those elements that were present 
and that could assume the various appropriate condi¬ 
tions at the existing temperature but they could not and 
did not add one ounce or take away one grain of those 
elements. 

As we shall show hereafter the extremely small margin 
within which these quantities and proportions had to be 
adjusted is something of which few persons have any 
conception. Dr. Alfred Russell Wallace in his very in¬ 
teresting and able work, Man's Place in the Universe , 
(page 260) speaking of the closeness with which the 
waters of the ocean are adjusted to the land says: 

“The quantity of hydrogen combined with oxygen 
to form the mass of water in our vast and deep oceans 
is enormous. Yet if it had been only one-tenth more 
than it actually is the present land surface would have 
been almost submerged. How the adjustment occurred 
so that there was exactly enough hydrogen to fill the vast 
ocean basins with water to such a depth as to leave enough 
land surface for the ample development of vegetable and 


128 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

animal life, and yet not so much as to be injurious to 
climate, it is difficult to imagine. Yet the adjustment 
stares us in the face.” 

Dr. Wallace seems, however, to have overlooked the 
fact that if one-tenth more hydrogen had been appor¬ 
tioned to this earth when it assumed a separate existence, 
the question of climate would have had very little interest 
for us; there would have been no free oxygen left, be¬ 
cause all of that element that did not combine with 
metals and with carbon, phosphorus, sulphur, etc. would 
have combined with the hydrogen, and, as is easily cal¬ 
culated, there would not have beeu nearly enough of it 
to take up one-tenth more hydrogen than now exists in 
water. A very simple calculation will prove this. 

His estimate, which I need scarcely say is quite accur¬ 
ate, is that if the surface of the earth were perfectly 
level and if the waters of the present oceans were dis¬ 
tributed equally over the entire globe, they would cover 
it to a depth of about two miles or 10,560 feet. Now, 
the present average pressure of the atmosphere is 14.73 
lbs. per square inch which is equivalent to a column of 
water 33.96 feet high. Taking round numbers and call¬ 
ing it 15 lbs. per square inch equal to 34 feet of water, 
the pressure of a column of water 10,560 feet deep 
would be about 4,650 lbs. per square inch. Of this, one- 
ninth or 517 lbs. would be due to the hydrogen in the 
water, the other eight-ninths being due to the oxygen. 


of Design in the Creation. 


129 


But the pressure due to the oxygen in the present atmos¬ 
phere is only 2.94 lbs. and it takes 8 lbs. of oxygen to 
reduce 1 lb. of hydrogen to water. 

Dr. Wallace asks for one-tenth more hydrogen; this 
would be 51.7 lbs. per square inch or the equivalent of 
413.6 lbs. of oxygen and therefore since the oxygen in 
the atmosphere amounts to only 2.94 lbs., his one-tenth 
more hydrogen would use up all the oxygen now present 
in the air 140 times over! Under such circumstances 
of course the atmosphere would have been entirely desti¬ 
tute of free oxygen and animal life would have been ab¬ 
solutely impossible. 

Dr. Wallace considers it “difficult to imagine” how 
an approximation so close as one-tenth could have been 
brought about but, as I hope to show presently, the neces¬ 
sary adjustments had to be nearly a million times closer 
than this in order to render this globe suitable for the 
development of vegetable and animal life. 


30 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


§ 14. The Adaptation of the Atmosphere to Plant 
and Animal Life. 

The facts and principles which have been stated and 
explained on preceding pages will enable the reader to 
understand and appreciate those characteristics and 
adaptations of the atmosphere which make this earth a 
suitable habitation for plants and animals as we know 
them. The conditions necessary to this end involve not 
only the chemical and physical qualities of the air, but, 
as we shall see, they extend even to its mere quantity 
or mass. 

We have already had occasion to allude to the fact 
that the various conditions known as solid, liquid and 
gaseous, in which the materials that form this globe are 
found, depend entirely upon temperature. The most 
refractory solids, such as iron, platinum and even car¬ 
bon and silicon may, by a sufficient increase of temper¬ 
ature, be made to assume the gaseous form, and the most 
volatile substances, such as hydrogen, nitrogen, oxy¬ 
gen, etc. may, by reduction of temperature, be made to 
assume the liquid or even the solid state. Therefore the 
quantity of material which existed in the atmosphere in 


of Design in the Creation. 13 i 

a gaseous form at any period of the earth’s history must 
have depended largely upon the temperature of the earth 
at that particular time, taken in connection with the 
amount of matter that was capable of existing free as 
gas at the temperature which then prevailed. At the 
temperature of space, estimates of which vary from about 
-250° Fahr. to a point which is very little above that of 
absolute zero, there probably would be no atmosphere at 
all since all the matter with which we are acquainted, 
including the constituents of the air, would be reduced 
to the solid or at least the liquid condition, but this does 
not concern our present inquiry because at that low tem¬ 
perature there could not be any plant or animal life 
such as that with which we are familiar. The temper¬ 
ature which we have now to consider is that at which 
plants and animals flourish and especially that which is 
best fitted to promote the development and growth of 
the higher species of animals including man. This, as 
we all know, is confined to a very small range—some¬ 
thing like 100 deg. or 120 deg. Fahr. out of a possible 
range of from 10,000 to a point which we have no means 
of determining. 

The view now held by most scientific men is that the 
earth gradually attained its present temperature through 
a cooling process which was carried on during a long 
period of time and while this gradual cooling at last gave 
opportunity to the various organisms to take advantage 


132 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

of what was for them just the right temperature, there 
was no chemical or physical law which could regulate 
the quantity of the materials which went to form the 
atmosphere as a whole or the proportions of its various 
constituents at that temperature. At the time when the 
earth assumed a separate existence the quantity and 
the proportions of the various materials which now form 
it and its atmosphere were absolutely fixed and they 
must have been adjusted either by intelligent design, or, 
as the materialists claim, by “blind chance.’’ This point 
we shall discuss hereafter. Meanwhile it is easy for us 
with our present knowledge to determine what conse¬ 
quences would have followed from any considerable 
change either in the mere quantity of the atmospheric 
gases and vapors or in the proportions in which they are 
now present. 

We have seen that the atmosphere presses with a weight 
of 15 lbs. on every square inch of the earth’s surface and 
that 13 cubic feet of air weigh as much as a block of 
cast iron weighing one pound. It is also well known that 
when in motion the air has the same momentum as an 
equal weight of solid matter. This explains the tremen¬ 
dous force exerted by the air when in rapid motion as 
in hurricanes and cyclones, and it is easy to see that if 
the quantity of air surrounding the earth were to be 
greatly increased it would follow as a natural conse- 


of Design in the Creation. 


i 33 


quence that its pressure per square inch, its density or 
weight per cubic foot at ordinary levels and its momen¬ 
tum when in motion would all be increased in like pro¬ 
portion. It is therefore obvious that it would not require 
any very great increase in the mere quantity of the gases 
which form the atmosphere to convert what would now 
be a gentle breeze into a destructive hurricane without 
any actual increase in the velocity of the wind. And it 
is equally certain that under similar conditions of sun- 
heat, etc., the amount of watery vapor in the atmosphere 
would, in accordance with well known laws, be greatly 
augmented by an increase in the quantity of the other 
gases. Owing to this the changes in the temperature 
of the lower strata of the air would also be so increased 
that violent winds would be more prevalent and there 
would be such frequent and great changes from calm 
to the most fearful gales (not to speak of cyclones) that 
no tall plants could resist the tremendous force of the 
aerial currents thus set in motion and the earth would 
be a stormswept waste. 

This increase of the amount of moisture held in solu¬ 
tion in the air would also have its effect upon the rainfall 
which would not then descend in gentle showers to re¬ 
fresh the tender plants and herbs but would fall in such 
torrents that it would seem that ‘ 1 the windows of heaven 
had been opened ’ ’ and the downpour would sweep away 
plants and soil if such were present, and bury them in 


134 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

the depths of the ocean or beneath a destructive accum¬ 
ulation of debris. 

Moreover, a mere augmentation of the quantity of the 
atmosphere, even without any change in the proportions 
of its different constituents, would so greatly increase 
its density and consequently its power as a supporter 
of combustion that fires once started would be almost 
unextinguishable until all the fuel within reach had 
been consumed. A dry forest, once set on fire by the 
agency of man or by any of the numerous fire-producing 
processes of nature, such as lightning, would be com¬ 
pletely destroyed for if the increase in the mere quantity 
of the atmosphere were sufficiently great, even timber 
and growing plants would be burned up. 

A striking illustration of this principle was seen dur¬ 
ing the sinking of the caissons for the first East River 
Bridge between Brooklyn and New York. These caissons 
as most persons know, were simply huge diving bells 
made of wood and it was only by continually forcing in, 
under strong pressure, immense supplies of fresh air 
that the water was excluded and the workmen kept from 
suffocation. As this property of dense air was not gen¬ 
erally known at that time, one of the workmen stuck 
a lighted candle against the side of the caisson for the 
purpose of obtaining light for his work. The result 
was that the timber of which the caisson was constructed 
caught fire and it was with some difficulty that the fire 


of Design in the Creation. 135 

was extinguished. And only a few days ago the daily 
papers gave an account of a fire, due to similar causes, 
in the tunnel beneath the Hudson River. 

In some of these caissons it is now a common experi¬ 
ment to light a piece of paper, blow out the flame and 
see it again start into the most vivid combustion if the 
merest spark should remain. This is just what a wooden 
splint or a piece of paper with a spark at the end would 
do if plunged into pure oxygen. 

Similar phenomena accompanied the burning of com¬ 
mon alcohol lamps which, as we all know, emit a very 
feeble light in air at the ordinary pressure, but which 
were quite brilliant when burning in the condensed air 
of the caisson. 

But if the mere quantity of the materials which com¬ 
pose the atmosphere has such a powerful influence over 
its relations to plants and animals much more important 
would be that exerted by any considerable change in the 
proportions in which the several components are present 
in our aerial envelope. As at present constituted the 
atmosphere is adapted in a remarkable degree to the 
wants of both the animal and the vegetable kingdom 
but a careful examination will show if there had been 
even a comparatively slight change in the constitution 
of the air as regards the proportions of the gases of which 
it is composed, life, as we know it, would have been im¬ 
possible. Let us examine the grounds for this assertion. 


136 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

We have seen that nitrogen forms the great bulk (four- 
fifths) of the atmosphere and whatever may be the role 
which this gas plays in the physiological structure of 
plants and animals one important function which it 
serves under present conditions is the dilution of the oxy¬ 
gen which may, in round numbers, be said to constitute 
the other fifth. And it is a curious fact that, with a few 
exceptions which are almost negligible, all the nitrogen 
now forming a constituent paid of this planet exists in 
the free state in the atmosphere. The exceptions are (a) 
the comparatively small quantity which is found in the 
tissues of plants and animals; (6) that which is found in 
the few nitre beds which have been discovered, and (c) 
the small percentage found in coal and similar minerals. 
We have seen that the amount of oxygen which is locked 
up in the solid and liquid materials of the earth is some¬ 
thing enormous; it is very nearly equal to one-half of the 
weight of the entire globe while the amount present in the 
atmosphere is, as we shall see hereafter, only an insignifi¬ 
cant fraction of that quantity. Nitrogen occurs in no 
minerals that are not of organic origin and when in 
the free state it is not soluble to any great extent in the 
waters of oceans, lakes or rivers and consequently the 
amount that is abstracted and locked up in them is very 
small. 

Since one of the most obviously important functions 
of nitrogen is to act as a diluent of the oxygen of the air, 


of Design in the Creation. 137 

a comparison of the properties of the latter gas when in 
a pure state with those which it exhibits w r hen greatly 
diluted will best enable us to form a correct idea of the 
importance of such dilution. 

We have already seen that in pure oxygen all com¬ 
bustibles burn with an intensity of which any ordinary 
fire gives no adequate idea. As was stated when dis¬ 
cussing the properties of oxygen, an ordinary 
wooden splint, if ignited at the flame of a 
lamp or candle, very often ceases to burn in 
the air, if left to itself. Hence the necessity for pre¬ 
paring the wooden splints of lucifer matches with some 
easily ignited material such as sulphur or paraffin so 
that the flame which is started by the tip may not go 
out. But if there should be the slightest spark of fire 
on the end of a green twig and it be immersed in pure 
oxygen, it will at once burst into flame and continue 
to burn with an intensity and brilliancy which only those 
who have witnessed the experiment can realize. 

It must therefore be obvious that if the proportion in 
which oxygen now exists in the air were greatly increas¬ 
ed, a fire once started would continue to burn until ev¬ 
erything organic that was within reach had been com¬ 
pletely consumed. The slightest spark would start for¬ 
est and prairie fires which would spread over the sur¬ 
face of the land, burning up grass and herbs and leaving 
nothing but desolation in their path. No wooden house, 


138 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

if such could be constructed, would be safe for one mo¬ 
ment ; a spark from a bit of burning bark or an unextin¬ 
guished match splint thrown on a solid oaken plank floor, 
would ignite the whole fabric and cause a conflagration 
with which no fire department at present in existence 
could cope. We could no longer use iron for our grates, 
stoves and furnaces for the simple reason that the iron 
itself would burn with a fierceness of which only the 
experiments seen in the laboratory of the chemist or on 
the lecture table can give any idea. And as for animals, 
man himself included, if they could continue to live and 
perpetuate their species under such circumstances, it is 
fair to assume that their lives would be one ‘‘fitful 
fever”; they would literally burn the candle at both 
ends and their existence would be intense but brief. In 
cases of enfeeblement from sickness, physicians often 
avail themselves of this property of pure oxygen and 
administer it to their patients, but this furnishes no argu¬ 
ment against the danger of its continual use by healthy 
persons. 

On the other hand, if the proportion of oxygen were 
greatly diminished or, which is nearly the same thing, if 
the proportion of nitrogen were greatly increased, our 
lives would become lethargic and stolid; not only work 
but exercise would be a burden; young boys and girls 
would no longer move with a hop, skip and jump in the 
exuberance of their vitality; we would see no frisking 


of Design in the Creation. 139 

lambs and prancing colts—nothing but dull heavy move¬ 
ments compelled by hunger or physical necessity. Our 
fires too would die out or if by chopping wood into very 
thin splinters and drying it thoroughly, we could get an 
occasional fire to cook some food as a delicacy, the labor 
required would be very great. It might be possible to 
burn soft coal in some kind of furnace or grate made 
of a nonconducting material such as very porous fire¬ 
brick, provided we used a very tall chimney giving a 
strong draft, but hard coal would then be as difficult to 
ignite as are diamonds or graphite under the conditions 
which now exist. Under such circumstances man would 
be confined to the tropics for it would be impossible for 
the lungs to perform their functions with such energy 
as would generate sufficient heat to protect the body 
from even a moderate degree of cold. Life under such 
a state of things would be continued stagnation; it would 
be scarcely possible to secure much intellectual activity 
or advancement, and man, in his higher phase of being, 
would be an utter impossibility. At least it is certain 
that many of those inventions upon which modern civi¬ 
lization depends, such as steam engines, railroads, print¬ 
ing presses, telegraphs, etc., could never have been real¬ 
ized for the simple reason that there could have been no 
fires with which metals could be worked or power ob¬ 
tained. 


140 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

Although rather outside the scope of the argument with 
which this volume professes to deal. I have alluded to the 
effect which any great change in the atmosphere would 
have upon man and other animals because we are so fre¬ 
quently told that they might easily adapt themselves to 
almost any condition that could have arisen within cer¬ 
tain very wide limits. It seems to me, however, that the 
holders of such views either do not understand or over¬ 
look the fundamental principles of physiological chem¬ 
istry; that is to say, they do not give due weight to the 
chemical properties of those elements upon which life 
itself depends. Thus, in speaking of writers on the sub¬ 
ject of 4 ‘The Plurality of Worlds” Dr. Wallace says: 
“They seem to think if any of our quadrupeds or birds 
taken to another planet could not live there that no ani¬ 
mals of equally high organization could inhabit it; en¬ 
tirely overlooking the very obvious fact that supposing, 
as is amost certain, that oxygen is necessary for life, then 
whatever proportion of oxygen within certain limits, was 
present, the forms of life that arose would necessarily be 
organized in adaptation to that proportion, which might 
be considerably less or greater than on earth.” 

Now I am perfectly willing to concede that most species 
of animals have very great power of adaptation and 
might not only be developed under a very wide range 
of conditions, but might even make a great change in 
themselves in a few generations as was seen when grey- 


of Design in the Creation. 141 

hounds were first carried to the elevated plateaus of 
Mexico in the hope that they would furnish good sport 
coursing the hares of that region. The imported hounds, 
however, failed entirely to meet the expectations of their 
owners owing to the attenuation of the air caused by the 
great altitude. Even a short run completely exhausted 
them and they were kept only as mere pets and orna¬ 
ments. But their descendants, in a few generations, be¬ 
came adapted to the new conditions and were able to 
run as fast and as far as their ancestors could have done 
in the denser air of the sea level. In this case, however, 
the atmospheric change was not very great and it must 
be evident that there are well-defined limits to the extent 
to which such changes may be carried without exceeding 
the power of adaptation. In the case of the proportion 
of oxygen which might have existed in the atmosphere 
it is evidently possible that the air might have contained 
no oxygen at all, or it might have consisted of pure oxy¬ 
gen: Where, between these points, do the limiting pro¬ 
portions lie on either side ? This question is decided for 
us by the inorganic relations of oxygen to combustion, 
a fact which Dr. Wallace seems to have overlooked. A 
very trifling difference in the total amount of the oxidiz- 
able matter (hydrogen, calcium, magnesium, iron, etc.) 
which enters into the composition of the earth would 
either have used up all the oxygen and left the air total¬ 
ly unfit for animal life and incapable of supporting 


142 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


combustion, or it might have left so much oxygen 
that no plant or animal would have been safe from de¬ 
struction by fire. 

Let us see how almost infinitesimal is the difference 
in the amounts of the component materials of the globe 
which would have been required to bring about the most 
disastrous results. 

In working out the calculations necessary to deter¬ 
mine this point I shall express the quantities in ratios 
or comparative amounts for the simple reason that the 
actual weights, even when expressed in tons, give figures 
which are far beyond the grasp of any human intellect. 
Even the amount of carbonic acid in the air is estimated 
at three millions of millions of long tons although it is 
present to the extent of only 3 or 4 parts in every 10,000 
and the weight of the whole earth, when expressed in 
pounds, requires 26 figures, a number which, when taken 
by itself and not as a comparative expression, is little 
more than a mere name to even the highest human intel¬ 
lect. We are accustomed to hear the earth spoken of as 
being very small and a mere trifle when compared with 
the sun or with Sirius and so perhaps it is, and we also 
see it stated as a tradition that Archimedes claimed that 
if he only had a fulcrum he could move it out of its place. 
The reader who is curious in such matters will find in the 
Seven Follies of Science a calculation which gives the 
actual weight of the earth and which proves that if the 


of Design in the Creation. 143 

wish of Archimedes had been gratified and he had been 
provided with a fulcrum and a lever having arms of 
reasonable length and if he had been placed at the end 
of the longest arm and had moved with the speed of a 
cannonball, he could not, during his whole lifetime, have 
moved the earth through a space which could be measured 
by the finest measuring instruments ever devised. So 
enormous is the weight or mass of the earth when com¬ 
pared with the weight of the average man. Therefore 
in dealing with such immense quantities, the only way 
by which we can obtain clear ideas on the subject is to 
deal with ratios or comparative amounts. 

We have already said that if the earth were a smooth 
spheroid, with no mountains or valleys, a layer of water 
33.96 feet deep and covering the entire surface, would 
exactly equal in weight the amount of matter which ex¬ 
ists in the entire atmosphere. But the specific gravity 
of the earth, as a whole, is more than 5 1-2 times that of 
water; therefore a layer of material having the average 
specific gravity of the materials of which the earth is 
made and 6.17 feet thick, would be equal in weight to 
the atmosphere. Now the mean diameter of the earth 
is 7912 miles or, more accurately, 41,776,590 feet; this 
together with twice 6.17, would give the diameter of the 
solid earth to which had been added an amount of solid 
matter equal in weight to the atmosphere. In other 
words, the addition of an amount of matter equal to that 


144 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

found in the atmosphere would increase the diameter 
of the earth by considerably less than the one-three-mil¬ 
lionth part. 

This, however, does not fairly represent the relative 
proportions of the weights of the materials in the solid 
earth and in the atmosphere because a layer a few inches 
thick at the surface would equal some miles at the center. 
Spheres are to each other as the cubes of their diameters 
and therefore the true ratio of the mass of the solid earth 
with twice 6.17 feet added would be as the cubes of 
41,776,590 and 41,776,602.34. 

The calculation is easily made and as a result it will 
be found that the atmosphere is considerably less than 
the one-millionth part of the material which, at the sep¬ 
aration of the sun and earth, constituted this planet. 
From this, therefore, it is easily seen that the adjustment 
by which our atmosphere attained its present physical 
characteristics and its special relations to the rest of the 
planet, must have been made to less than the one-mil¬ 
lionth part of the entire amount of matter involved. In 
other words, a deviation to the extent of one-mil¬ 
lionth part or even less, would have left us either with 
no atmosphere at all or with one of double its present 
amount according as too much or too little matter of a 
special kind had been assigned to it. 

This relates wholly to the physical or mechanical re¬ 
lations of the atmosphere or to the atmosphere as a 


of Design in the Creation. 145 

whole, but the chemical adjustment had to be far closer 
than this. Oxygen forms but one-fifth of the air and 
therefore if the amount of oxidizable matter (hydrogen, 
carbon, calcium, magnesium, iron, zinc, etc.) in this 
globe had been the one-five-millionth part more than it 
is there would have been no oxygen at all in the atmos¬ 
phere and animal life as we know it would have been 
impossible. 

But it was necessary to adjust these materials even 
more closely than to the five-millionth part; if there had 
been one ten-millionth part more of these oxidizable 
matters, including a greater proportion of hydrogen, 
the amount of oxygen in the air would have been reduced 
by one-half and none of the higher animals could have 
adjusted themselves to such conditions. 

On the other hand, if the quantity of these oxidizable 
materials had been reduced by one ten-millionth part, 
the atmosphere would have been so rich in oxygen that 
organic matter would have been in constant danger of 
destruction by fire, if it could ever have come into exis¬ 
tence at all, which is very doubtful. 

In this calculation I have not deemed it necessary to 
take account of the combining weights of the different 
elements because a very slight increase or diminution 
of the proportion of carbon or hydrogen would counter¬ 
balance the greater combining weights of the metals. 


146 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


§15. How Were These Adjustments Brought About ? 

When we consider the closeness and accuracy of the 
adaptations and adjustments which have been just de¬ 
scribed and which were absolutely necessary to the 
preparation of the ealrth as a habitation for man, the 
question at once arises: How were these delicate ad¬ 
justments brought about? 

Hitherto two answers have been given to this ques¬ 
tion, one being that they came by the intelligent design 
of a self-conscious Being, possessed of omniscience in 
regard to all things, past, present and to come; who 
amongst other things clearly foresaw the requirements 
that would be necessary for the future development of 
this planet, or, if you please, for its evolution and who 
had the power and the will to bring about the neces¬ 
sary conditions. 

The other answer is that attributed to Lucretius who 
is said to have claimed that they were due to the “ for¬ 
tuitous concourse of atoms,” or, as the latest apostle 
of materialism defines or “formulates” it, to “blind 
chance.” 

To these may in some cases perhaps be added a third 
to which I have given the name of { ‘ automatic mechan- 


of Design in the Creation. 147 

ical adaptation.’’ By this it is claimed that the result 
is due to the inherent properties of matter and to the 
laws of energy and force, and, in various modifications, 
this hypothesis is a favorite with those who wish an ex¬ 
planation outside of intelligent design but who realize 
the absurdity of supposing that mere chance could ever 
have given rise to such a complicated and nicely ad¬ 
justed order of things as that which we see around 
us. But, as we shall see hereafter, this explanation not 
only fails in some essential points, but it leaves out of 
consideration one of the most vital of all conditions, 
that of far-sighted intention or purpose. 

Of course we must exclude from consideration all 
reference to those organic adaptations which are shown 
in the structure of living plants and animals. The ma¬ 
terialistic evolutionist claims, and justly, perhaps, that 
these adaptations have been brought about by the or¬ 
ganisms themselves acting under the influence of gen¬ 
eral forces and laws. The difference between this view 
and that which is presented in the present volume, and 
which is the view held by many able scientific men, 
is that while the materialistic evolutionist claims that 
the powers which brought about these adaptations are 
inherent in the very nature of matter and energy, the 
theist holds that these powers are derived from forces 
and laws which were ordained by a Supreme Ruler, 
as I have endeavored to explain under the heading: 
‘ 4 Creation by Law. ’ ’ 


148 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


But the problem which relates to inorganic evolution 
and which is here presented, admits of no such solution, 
as that which the materialist advances in the case of 
organic development. 

Granting all that the evolutionist claims in regard to 
the development of plant and animal structures, how 
about those inorganic adjustments which obviously 
were outside of the scope of natural selection and 
adaptation and even of the guiding influence of physical 
forces and laws, and yet which are not only as essential 
to the ultimate result as the most delicate physiological 
arrangement? These must have been the result either 
of far-seeing intention and intelligent design, or of 
chance in which the probabilities were almost infinite 
(many millions to one) against this particular combina¬ 
tion having occurred. 

Let us therefore carefully examine how far any or 
all of the hypotheses which have been named can aid us 
in solving this great question or “ riddle/’ for a riddle it 
surely is. 

And first of all let us take up that hypothesis which 
is such a favorite with many. 


of Design in the Creation. 


149 


§ 16. Automatic Mechanical Adaptation. 

When, by some purely mechanical process, the con¬ 
ditions required for the production of any phenomenon 
are brought about apparently without the direct in¬ 
terposition of intelligent guidance or, in other words, 
without guidance by mind, it may be reasonably said 
that the adjustment is due to automatic mechanical 
adaptation. Of course the theist, and especially the 
Christian, would claim that all phenomena or occur¬ 
rences in nature owe their inception, their guidance and 
their consummation to divine power but as this is the very 
point which we are endeavoring to prove we must not, 
at this stage, assume it to be true. 

There is a very common but very striking lecture 
room experiment which illustrates such adaptation in a 
remarkably forcible manner. It is generally perform¬ 
ed for the purpose of exhibiting one of the most rudi¬ 
mentary facts taught in the chemical classroom, viz. 
that a properly proportioned mixture of hydrogen with 
oxygen or air explodes with considerable violence when 
ignited. But it has also been found that in order to 
produce an explosion, the hydrogen and the oxygen or 
air must be present in certain proportions; if too much 
air or too much hydrogen be present, no explosion will 


150 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

take place. Having satisfied himself as to what these 
proportions are, the chemist can easily provide a mix¬ 
ture which will explode infallibly when brought into 
contact with a flame. Every step in an experiment so 
conducted is, however, the direct result of guidance 
by human intelligence, and this is of course most ob¬ 
viously true as to the measuring of those quantities of 
air and hydrogen that have been found by experiment 
to be most effective. Of course the laws of chemical 
combination insure that after combination has taken 
place only certain definite quantities of each element 
will be found in union with each other, but the agency 
either of intelligence or of automatic mechanical adap¬ 
tation is necessary to adjust the proper proportions 
before the chemical laws can be allowed to come into 
operation. To give an illustration of this automatic 
adaptation let us take some suitable vessel (a small tin 
can such as is used for canning soups, etc. and which 
is about 41/2 inches long and 3 inches in diameter, an¬ 
swers as well as anything)* and, one end being open, 
let us make two or three small punctures close to the 

♦The dealers in chemical apparatus sell a jar made express¬ 
ly for exhibiting this experiment and known as a “mosquito 
jar,” so called from the sound made by the burning hydrogen 
at a certain stage, but the can described in the text answers 
quite as well and is easily prepared. The holes should not 
be too large; if they admit a stout pin they will be about right 
and they may be easily made by means of a stout sewing 
needle. In order to prevent the too rapid waste of the hy¬ 
drogen by diffusion at the lower end, it is well to cover this 


of Design in the Creation. i 51 

tin cap which covers the closed end. Then if we hold 
this can, open end down, over a jet of hydrogen, the 
can will soon be filled with the gas which will stream 
out of the small holes at the upper end. This is caused 
by the extreme lightness of hydrogen as compared with 
the air so that the latter, pressing upward, forces the 
hydrogen out. Now remove the can from the hydrogen 
jet'; the gas will continue to escape at the small punc¬ 
tures, where it may be ignited and will burn with a 
quiet flame, because the proportion of the hydrogen 
in the can is too large to allow of an explosion. But 
as the gas continues to escape, the proportion of air to 
hydrogen gradually increases and in a few seconds a 
series of slight explosions occur at the apertures and 
follow each other with such rapidity that they give rise 
to a sound resembling the buzzing of a swarm of mos¬ 
quitoes. This goes on; the proportion of air increases 
as that of the hydrogen decreases until the entire con¬ 
tents of the can attain the requisite proportions, and 
when this point is reached the whole goes off with 
a loud report. 

Now in nature we find instances of the same sort of 
action, none being more striking and important than that 
which brought the earth to its present condition as to 

opening with a piece of paper having a hole about an inch in- 
diameter in the center. The experiment is a very striking and 
instructive one and never fails to work even in the hands of 
the beginner. 



152 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


temperature, a condition which fitted it for the reception 
of plant and animal life. That the earth was at one time 
so hot that no plant or animal could exist upon its sur¬ 
face is the accepted faith of all scientific men. From 
this condition it gradually cooled, passing through var¬ 
ious stages until it reached that of a globe on which water 
would remain in the liquid form. At first the atmos¬ 
pheric pressure on the surface of this primeval ocean 
must have been so great that the temperature of the 
liquid was probably several times that of the water which 
we see in our boiling tea-kettles, and this would no doubt 
give it an extraordinary power to dissolve and hold in 
solution various earthy and saline matters which are now 
regarded as almost insoluble but it would also prevent 
the development of animal and vegetable life. 

But the process of cooling went on until the earth was 
fitted to support, first, minute plants, then larger plants 
and animals, and finally man himself. 

Now all this occurred in obedience to the operation of 
well-established natural laws which we can follow in their 
working, the materialist claiming that such laws are em¬ 
bodied in the very nature of primeval matter, and that 
they do not require the intervention of any guiding In¬ 
telligence or Deity. They assume the same position as 
that taken by La Place who, when he was asked where 
the agency of God appeared in his system as laid down 
in the famous Mechanique Celeste , replied: “I have no 
need of that hypothesis . f 1 And however firmly we may 


of Design in the Creation. 153 

believe that in everything God is immanent, we are will¬ 
ing for the sake of our present argument to admit that 
there might be cases of adaptation in obedience to gen¬ 
eral laws and without special divine guidance and this 
matter of the adjustment of the earth’s temperature to 
plant and animal life we take to be a fair example of the 
class. 

There may also be found in the case of the expansion 
of water between 39 deg and 32 deg. Fahr. a striking 
illustration of remarkable adaptation to the conditions 
required for the preservation of animal and vegetable 
life. A very general law is that bodies expand when 
heated and contract when cooled but to this there are a 
few marked exceptions such as antimony, iron, water 
and some other substances when near the point of solidi¬ 
fication. When water at 39 deg. is cooled it actually 
expands instead of contracting. The result of this is that 
in a cold winter the water in a deep pool is warmer at 
the bottom than it is at the top, the consequence being 
that it requires a very severe cold to produce a thick 
sheet of ice and the deep vrater being protected by the 
presence of the ice above it from the cold air, aquatic 
plants and animals find a safe place in which to pass 
the winter months. If it were not for this law our lakes 
and deep ponds would be frozen solid and no summer 
would be long enough to thaw them out. This important 
result might be regarded as a case of automatic mechan¬ 
ical adaptation depending upon the peculiar properties 


154 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

of water though very many intelligent men would regard 
it as an adaptation depending upon properties and laws 
which had been ordained under the guidance of a Su¬ 
preme and far-seeing Intelligence, while others point to 
the fact that molten iron and antimony exhibit the same 
peculiarity although it is certain that in those cases 
there is no plant or animal life to be served. 

The distinction between automatic adaptation which 
depends upon physical laws and the properties of matter 
and that adaptation which arises either from “blind 
chance” or intelligent design is very well seen when we 
contrast the adaptation of the present temperature of 
the earth to plant and animal life with the constitution 
of the atmosphere and its evolution. 

We have seen that out of a possible range which per¬ 
haps lies between 3000 deg. (the estimate of Helmholtz 
of the original temperature of the earth) and -461 deg. 
Fahr. (-272.72 cent.) there is but a narrow 7 margin of a 
little over 100 deg. in which plant and animal life 
is possible. But it is obvious that if the earth had been 
gradually cooling from 3000 deg. to -461 deg. there 
must have been a particular stage at which it would 
reach the required temperature however narrow might 
be the margin. 

But in the case of the atmosphere there was no steady 
and gradual change which could lead to the adjustment 
of the quantities of oxygen and nitrogen that were re¬ 
quired. In other w 7 ords, there was no law or principle 


of Design in the Creation. 


iS 5 


which could have led to this result or controlled in any 
degree the kind of matter which was necessary to produce 
it. A few million tons, more or less, of hydrogen, cal¬ 
cium, or magnesium would, if more than at present, have 
withdrawn all the oxygen now in the atmosphere and 
left it entirely unfit to support animal life, or on the 
other hand, if too small in quantity, it would have left 
the atmosphere so rich in oxygen that the first spark 
of fire would have consumed every organic object on the 
globe. And all this must have been fixed when the ma¬ 
terials which were to compose the future earth were first 
brought together and while they were largely in a state 
of vapor. It is therefore obvious that since there is no 
physical law or property of matter which could have 
led automatically to the present constitution of things, 
the setting apart of just the right quantities required 
to produce present conditions, was not the result of any 
lengthened automatic mechanical process. 


§ 17. Chance. 

“ There seems to be no alternative but to leave every¬ 
thing to ‘blind chance.’ ” 

Such is the latest conclusion of the modern apostle of 
atheistic materialism in his search for an explanation 


156 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

of the existing condition of things or in other words for 
a solution of the great “Riddle.” 

Now, to the true man of science, there is no such thing 
as “ chance/ ’ blind or otherwise. Every movement of 
every atom in the universe, from those of the giant suns 
which wheel through space down to the tiny motes that 
dance in the rays of the summer sun, is ordered and 
controlled by physical forces acting according to the 
most rigorous laws. There is not a raindrop that falls up¬ 
on the earth; not a molecule that takes part in the great 
evolutionary procession, the relations of which are not 
determined by an unbroken chain of effect and cause 
which leads up to the primeval “ fire-mist. ’ } To this 
there is but one possible exception, as we shall point out 
further on. 

Let us see what La Place, one of the greatest scientists 
that ever lived, says upon this point. In his Theorie 
Analytique des Probabilities may be found the following 
passage: 

“We ought, then, to regard the present state of the 
universe as the effect of its preceding state, and as the 
cause of that which is to follow. 

“An intelligent being that for a given moment could 
fully know and understand all the forces which are active 
in nature, and the respective situations of the particles 
which compose it; if, besides, this intelligence was capable 
of submittng these data to an analysis which should em¬ 
brace in the same formula the movements not only of 


of Design in the Creation. 157 

the largest bodies of the universe, but those of the smal¬ 
lest atoms, nothing would be uncertain to it, and the 
future as well as the past would be present to its vision. 

“The human mind presents, in the perfection with 
which it has attained a knowledge of astronomy, a weak 
outline of this intelligence. Its discoveries in mechanics 
and in geometry, combined with those of universal grav¬ 
itation, have enabled it to comprehend in the same ana¬ 
lytical expressions, the past and future states of our own 
system. 

“In applying the same method to other objects of 
knowledge it has succeeded in bringing the observed 
phenomena under general laws, and has foreseen those 
which the given conditions ought to disclose. All its ef¬ 
forts in the search after truth tend to approach without 
ceasing to the intelligence which we have just conceived, 
but from which it must always remain at an infinite dis¬ 
tance. ’ ’ 

Even in daily life we attribute events and phenomena 
to chance simply because we are ignorant of the data in¬ 
volved and because we probably could not use these data 
if we had them. Take such a simple matter as the 
tossing of a coin and the question whether it will fall 
head or tail. Most persons would say that it was a mat¬ 
ter of pure chance but the scientist looks at it in a dif¬ 
ferent light. 

Thus Croft, in his article on “Probability,” in the 
Encyclopaedia Britannica, says: 


158 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

“Why for instance if we throw up a shilling, are we 
uncertain whether it will turn up head or tail? Be¬ 
cause the shilling passes, in the interval, through a series 
of states which our knowledge is unable to predict or to 
follow. If we knew the exact position and state of mo¬ 
tion of the coin as it leaves our hand, the exact value of 
the final impulse it receives, the laws of motion as affec- 
ted by the resistance of the air and of gravity, and final¬ 
ly the nature of the ground at the exact spot where it 
falls, and the laws regulating the collision between the 
two substances, we could predict as certainly the result 
of the toss as we can which letter of the alphabet will be 
drawn after twenty-five have been taken and examined. ” 

If we give due weight to these considerations we 
must see that what is ordinarily called chance is simply 
an expression of our ignorance of the data involved and 
of our inability to draw the proper conclusions from 
them. In the case of a machine, the engineer is able to 
understand the action of the various forces at work and 
to calculate the results, but to do this in the complicated 
processes of nature where the modes of action are often 
unknown, is frequently impossible and then we are apt 
to say that the result is due to chance. 

But while matter moves and acts in obedience to forces 
derived from various forms of energy, we know that in 
some cases these movements are subject to guidance by 
mind or intelligence and whether we understand the mode 
of action of the latter or not, we are conscious of our 


of Design in the Creation. 


*59 

ability to move a stone in direct opposition to the action 
of gravity and to guide the movements of bodies in direc¬ 
tions opposite to that in which previous causes would have 
guided them and which they never would have taken if 
it had not been for the agency of mind. 

As an example of such interference and guidance let 
me quote an illustration which must be familiar to most 
of the readers of this book as it has been used again and 
again by moralizers and sermonizers. 

As most persons know, the Rocky Mountains form a 
sort of back-bone to this continent and divide at least 
a portion of it into two parts, one of which slopes to the 
east and the other to the west. At one point in this 
dividing ridge, the rocks form a sharply defined line so 
that if, during a rainstorm, the drops fall on one side 
they go to the east and finally reach the stormy Atlantic 
while if they fall a few inches towards the west they at 
once begin a long course towards the Pacific and at last 
they find themselves in waves which circle round the 
sunny isles of the Southern Ocean. 

As a simile which may be used to ‘ ‘ point a moral ’ ’ all 
this is obvious and striking, but the point which I wish 
to emphasize here is the unquestionable fact that the 
lc ng line of physical causes and effects which determined 
the side of the dividing line upon which each drop should 
fall, began in the primeval nebula, was carried, without 
a break of continuity, until it resulted in sending each 
drop on its destined w'ay and will undoubtedly follow it 


s6o The Atmosphere as a Proof 

across the continent and will not cease to exert an influ¬ 
ence on each molecule even when one finds its final 
resting* place in the eastern and the other in the western 
ocean. 

But now mark: As we stand on that sharp ledge with 
an umbrella or perhaps a shingle in our hand, we men¬ 
tally determine that those drops which within a certain 
area, are about to go to the east in obedience to the 
action of previous causes, shall go to the west; we place 
the shingle or the umbrella in such a position that it 
will divert them from the course they were about to take, 
and lo, the continuity of millions upon millions of years 
is broken, and the entire future of these molecules is 
changed! The line of their apparent destiny might have 
led to their being buried in the ooze of some stagnant 
gulf where they might have helped to build up the fabric 
of some plant of a low order; the change may lead to 
their forming one of the constituents of some food fish 
which may furnish brain material that shall perhaps en¬ 
able the recipient to evolve the most sublime poetry or 
develop the most important scientific discovery. 

In all this nothing is said of determinism, free will, 
fate and all those questions which have been the prob¬ 
lems of the ages—the storm-centers of academic discus¬ 
sion. These problems never have been solved and prob¬ 
ably never will be solved in this life. According to Mil- 
ton even the devils themselves could not solve them for 
of the highest intellects amongst them he says: 


of Design in the Creation. 161 

"Others apart sat on a hill retired 

In thoughts more elevate, and reason’d high 
Of providence, foreknowledge, will and fate, 

Fixed fate, free will, foreknowledge absolute, 

And found no end, in wandering mazes lost.” 

And Pope’s famous couplet: 

"And binding nature fast in fate 
Left free the human will.” 

throws no light on the question. 

To avoid the difficulties which have always surround¬ 
ed these problems, Haeckel and his school deny the exis¬ 
tence of mind or intellect as such and, as we have already 
seen, they assert that these in all their relations are 
merely a function of organized matter. This is cut¬ 
ting the Gordian knot with a vengeance. 

But granting that mind and will are subject to the 
strict laws of cause and effect and that they, equally 
with nature, are bound 11 fast in fate, ’ ’ it is certain that 
mind does exert a guiding influence over matter and that 
it is to a supreme Intelligence that we must look for an 
explanation of those wonderful arrangements which meet 
us at every turn in the universe around us. 

Fortunately, however, in this maze of difficulties and 
apparent contradictions we are not left altogether with¬ 
out a guide through the darkness which surrounds us. It 
has been found that all physical results follow the law 
of probability and mathematicians have elaborated a 
calculus of probability the results of which, when prac¬ 
tically tested, have been found to coincide with wonder- 


* 162 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


ful accuracy with natural phenomena. In his essay on 
this subject Sir John Herschel says: “Men were sur¬ 
prised to hear that not only births, deaths and marriages, 
but the decisions of tribunals, the results of popular 
elections, the influence of punishments in checking crime, 
the comparative value of medical remedies, the probable 
limits of error in numerical results in every department 
of physical inquiry, the detection of causes, physical, 
social and moral, nay, even the weight of evidence and 
the validity of logical argument might come to be sur¬ 
veyed with the lynx-eyed scrutiny of a dispassionate 
analysis.” 

If the theory of probability will enable us to reach 
correct conclusions in the numerous and very diverse 
cases mentioned by Sir John Herschel, surely it may be 
made to render us invaluable aid in the determination 
of the great question with which the present volume is 
concerned. Of course the mathematical theory is too 
technical for discussion in these pages; those who desire 
to extend their studies in this direction will find several 
excellent textbooks on the theory, and a very complete 
article' in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, under the 
heading “Probability.” We must therefore rest con¬ 
tent with a very popular presentation of the subject. 

The various incidents w r hieh we are apt to attribute 
to chance may, for convenience, be referred to one of 
three classes: 1. Accident; 2. Coincidence; 3. Complex 
Combinations. These we shall describe in their order. 


of Design in the Creation. 163 

It may not always be easy to refer any particular in¬ 
stance to a special class as some cases present the feat¬ 
ures of more than one, but the classification holds good 
as a general rule and enables us to obtain clearer ideas 
of the subject. 


Accident. 

Events and phenomena which fall under this head are 
of the simplest description and involve no complicated 
series of conditions. As an illustration, let us take the 
case of the soldiers on the field of Waterloo or any of 
the old battles. Armed with muskets with which it was 
impossible to make sure of hitting an object the size of 
a man at 200 yards, the opposing ranks may be said to 
have fired at random and it might be said that it was a 
mere chance that any particular bullet should strike one 
of the enemy. With a modern rifle a good marksman 
can hit his man every time at that distance, and if the 
soldiers are well trained and steady, the element of 
chance or uncertainty is almost eliminated but under the 
old system the question of whether a man should hit or 
be hit was as much a matter of chance as the throwing 
of dice or the drawing of a lottery. We all know that 
“hair-breadth” escapes are common and most extraordi¬ 
nary results have been apparently due to mere chance, 
but it will be found that in every case they stop short of 
violating the law known as the “theory of probability.” 
The following example is a striking illustration of the pos- 


164 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

sibilities in such cases and I trust that my readers will 
pardon the personal character of the anecdote as it en¬ 
ables me to vouch for the accuracy of the particulars. 

Towards the close of his life Sir Walter Scott made a 
careful revision of the Waverly Novels and the new and 
uniform edition, which he called his “Opus Magnum” 
was published in 1829-33. As a boy, brought up at Melrose, 
which is but a short distance from Abbotsford, I had 
often handled and read most of the volumes of this edi¬ 
tion and had admired the beautiful frontispieces and 
vignettes so that they acquired a peculiar charm in my 
eyes. This edition was issued in 48 volumes, some of 
them, after Scott’s death which occurred in 1832. Pass¬ 
ing through Ann Street, New York, some years ago I 
saw on a stand among the ten-cent books, an odd volume 
of this edition (not of the set or copy with which I had 
been familiar in boyhood, and although it contained only 
the latter half of “Old Mortality” and the first part of 
* 1 The Heart of Midlothian, ’ ’ I bought it for old memory’s 
sake and carried it home. A year or two after this I 
found another volume in a different bookstore and I 
bought that, as it was apparently from the same set. 
Some years after I had made these two purchases, there 
fell into my hands a catalogue of old books belonging to 
John J. Cronin, deceased. These were to be sold at 
auction by Bangs & Co., on April 13th and 14th, 1896, 
and in this catalogue was one lot (No. 349)—Scott’s 
Waverly Novels, described as “46 vols. out of 48 (lacks 


of Design in the Creation. 165 

11 and 32 etc.” I found on examination that the two 
volumes that I had picked up at different times and 
in different places were the very volumes that were miss¬ 
ing from this set. As the broken lot went for a small 
price I bought it and the 48 volumes now stand on my 
shelves forming a complete set. 

Now this was certainly a remarkable case of what some 
would call chance and luck. It is true that in this in¬ 
stance chance was aided to a certain extent by intelli¬ 
gent guidance, but the three different portions of the set 
were not brought together by any mere mechanical 
agency although of course it is very certain that mere 
accident had much to do with bringing them under my 
notice. But I did not advertise for them and took no 
special, pains to find them and yet the complete set 
fell into my hands. 

But suppose that about that time a tidal wave had 
struck New York and washed an immense quantity of 
property out of the city and landed it up in West 
Chester County, and suppose further, that amongst the 
debris the three different and at one time widely separat¬ 
ed portions of this set of Waverly had been brought to¬ 
gether and landed in one place in orderly arrangement; 
would not that have been regarded as little short of 
miraculous ? 

And yet even such an extraordinary occurrence would 
be far, far from equalling that which must have oc¬ 
curred when the materials out of which this planet 


1 66 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

was evolved were gathered together in minutely adjust¬ 
ed proportions, brought to their appointed place and set 
in action to produce the planet on which we live. Few 
people can believe that these adjustments and arrange¬ 
ments were brought about by “ chance/ ’ or in other 
words without intelligent intention and design. 

Coincidence. 

When we find two occurrences or phenomena which 
do not seem to be related to each other in their origin 
and which have no apparent causal connection with each 
other but which have an important bearing upon each 
other at the moment of their happening, we generally 
attribute them to a coincidence which we set down to 
chance. For example: A child or a young woman may 
be attacked on a lonely road and there may seem to be 
no way of escape; just at that moment, however, a 
stranger crosses from another direction and the victim 
is saved. There was no causal connection between the 
movements of the victim and the rescuer and, so far as 
we can see, the time at which the attack was made and 
that at which the rescuer appeared might have been 
hours apart, in which case the rescue could not have 
been made. Some persons would say that the appearance 
of the stranger was a happy chance and we do not pro¬ 
pose to gainsay them. Life is full of such coincidences 
and sometimes they give rise to the most mistaken no¬ 
tions. Thus in the case of medical remedies and quack 


of Design in the Creation, 167 

doctors who have effected the most wonderful cures 
‘‘after all others had failed;” the cures have often been 
mere coincidences, the disease having taken a turn just 
at the time that the new remedy or the new doctor came 
upon the scene and then all the credit is given to those 
who had really no influence in causing the favorable re¬ 
sult. 

Undoubtedly some alleged miracles owe their miracu¬ 
lous character entirely to a happy coincidence. Hux¬ 
ley, in his discussion of Hume’s Essay upon Miracles, 
calls attention to one case of this kind which would cer¬ 
tainly have been accounted a miracle if due advantage 
had been taken of its occurrence. 

‘ ‘ On the 19th of February, 1842, Sir Robert Sale held 
Jellalabad with a small English force and daily expect¬ 
ing an attack from an overwhelming force of Afghans, 
had spent three months in incessantly laboring to im¬ 
prove the fortifications of the town. Akbar Khan had 
approached within a few miles, and an onslaught of his 
army was supposed to be imminent. That morning an 
earthquake nearly destroyed the town, threw down the 
greater part of the parapets, the central gate with the 
adjoining bastions, and a part of the new bastion which 
flanked it. Three other bastions were also nearly des¬ 
troyed, whilst several large breaches were made in the 
curtains, and the Peshawur side, eightly feet long, was 
quite practicable, the ditch being filled, and the descent 
easy. Thus, in one moment, the labors of three months 


168 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

were in a great measure destroyed. If Akbar Khan had 
happened to give orders for an assault in the early 
morning of the 19th of February what good follower of 
the Prophet could have doubted that Allah had lent his 
aid? As it chanced, however, Mahometan faith in the 
miraculous took another turn; for the energetic defend¬ 
ers of the post had repaired the damage by the end of 
the month; and the enemy finding no signs of the earth¬ 
quake when they invested the place, ascribed the sup¬ 
posed immunity of Jellalabad to English witchcraft.’’ 

Those who are interested in the subject will find a 
large number of coincidences related in that curious 
book, A Budget of Paradoxes by Professor Augustus De 
Morgan. One of the most remarkable was that which 
occurred to the Astronomer Royal. An old woman, 
thinking that an astronomer must of course be a skilful 
astrologer, came to him to find out the whereabouts of 
a bundle of linen which had strayed. Flamstead drew a 
circle, put a square into it and gravely pointed out a 
ditch, near the cottage, in which he said it would be 
found. He meant to have given the woman a little good 
advice when she came back, but she came back in great 
delight, with the bundle in her hand, found in the very 
place! 

It is certain, however, that nothing in the way of mere 
coincidence can explain the guidance and adjustments 
which were necessary to evolve such an atmosphere as 
that in which we live. As we shall see presently the eo- 


of Design in the Creation. 169 

incidences which were necessary to produce the required 
result were too numerous and too complex to permit of 
any such explanation. 

Complex Combinations. 

It is obvious that the more numerous the conditions 
that are to be complied with in order to bring about 
any occurrence, the less likelihood there is of its happen¬ 
ing. Thus it is quite probable that when I visit a city 
in which I have numerous acquaintances, I shall meet 
some friend somewhere on its streets; if the condition is 
that I shall meet him at a certain corner the probability 
is greatly lessened, and if the conditions are limited to 
a particular friend at a particular place, without previ¬ 
ous arrangement, the probability becomes very small in¬ 
deed, while if the conditions are that I shall meet two 
friends, not connected with each other, at a particular 
place, without previous arrangement, the probability al¬ 
most vanishes. 

This is easily understood even by those who have never 
given the slightest attention to the theory of probability, 
but the numerical value of such a chance is best seen in 
certain performances which for this very reason have be¬ 
come favorites with gamblers and betting men. Of the 
evils of betting and gambling for gain and the utter 
immorality of such practices even when sanctioned by 
churches and charitable associations, it is unnecessary 
to speak but these objections do not apply to the throw- 


170 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

ing of dice, the drawing of lots or the tossing of coins for 
the purpose of determining the scientific principles in¬ 
volved in the theory of probability. 

It is well understood that in tossing a coin, heads will 
turn up about as often as tails. In half a dozen tosses 
the preponderance on the side of one or the other may 
be very marked but in 1,000 tosses it will be found that 
the percentage of excess of one over the other will be very 
small. 

But while on each single toss the chances as regards 
either head or tail are even, and while on a thousand 
tosses it is certain that the result will be practically even, 
the chance that either head or tail will turn up several 
times in succession is quite small, and as the number of 
tosses in which either head or tail is to appear successive¬ 
ly is increased, the chances of the succession being kept up 
continually diminishes. There is no record of heads (or 
tails) having been thrown twenty times in succession 
and it is said that no number has ever turned up ten 
times in succession at roulette. 

In drawing lots, where a certain number of balls of 
one color are placed in a bag with one ball of a different 
color, the chance of the one ball being drawn diminishes 
as the number of the balls of the other color is increased. 
When nine black balls and one white are placed in a 
bag, it will sometimes happen that the white ball will be 
drawn the first time but the chance in favor of it is only 
one out of ten. This is easily understood because there 


of Design in the Creation. 171 

are ten balls in all and only one white; if there had 
been ninety-nine black balls and only one white, the 
chance for drawing the latter would have been one out 
of a hundred. Still, even a chance of one in a hundred 
will sometimes win since there is no physical reason why 
the white ball should not be the one that presents itself 
first to the hand but the probability of the white ball be¬ 
ing drawn under such circumstances twice in succession 
is very small indeed, only one in ten thousand. The con¬ 
ditions have been rendered one hundred times more 
complex and the likelihood of success has been diminish¬ 
ed in exactly the same proportion. That with nine black 
and one white in the bag, white should be drawn ten 
times in succession would be incredible. 

In illustration of the utter improbability of any such 
result occurring by mere chance under these complex 
conditions, Sir Robert S. Ball relates the following in¬ 
teresting parable in his work The Earth’s Beginnings : 

‘ * There were seven classes in a school and there were 
ten boys in each class. There was one boy named Smith 
in the first class, but only one. There was also one 
Smith, but only one, in each of the other classes. The 
others were named Brown, Jones, Robinson, etc. An old 
boy, named Captain Smith, who had gone out to Austra¬ 
lia many years before, came back to visit his old school. 
He had succeeded well in the world, and he wanted to 
do something generous for the boys at the place of which 
he had such kindly recollections. He determined to 


r 72 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

give a plumcake to one boy in each class; and the 
fortunate boy was to be chosen by lot. The ten boys 
in each class were to draw, and each successful boy 
was to be sent in to Captain Smith to receive his 
cake. 

“The Captain sat at the table, and the seven winners 
were shown in to receive their prizes. ‘What is your 
name?’ he said to the boy in the first class, as he shook 
hands with him. ‘Smith/ replied the boy. ‘Dear me/ 
said the Captain, ‘how odd that our names should be the 
same. Never mind, it’s a good name. Here’s your cake. 
Good-bye, Smith.’ Then up came the boy from the sec¬ 
ond class. ‘What is your name?’ said the Captain. 
‘Smith, sir,’ was the reply. ‘Dear me,’ said the visitor. 
‘This is very singular. It is indeed a very curious co¬ 
incidence that two Smiths should have succeeded. Were 
you really chosen by drawing lots?’ ‘Yes, sir,’ said the 
boy. ‘ Then are all the boys in your class named Smith ? ’ 
‘No, sir, I’m the only one of that name in ten.’ ‘Well,’ 
said the Captain, ‘it is really most curious. I never 
heard anything so extraordinary as that two namesakes 
of my own should happen to be the winners. Now, then, 
for the boy from class three.’ A cheerful youth ad¬ 
vanced with a smile. ‘Well, at all events,’ said the 
good-natured old boy, ‘your name is not Smith?’ ‘Oh, 
but it is,’ said the youth. The gallant Captain jump¬ 
ed up and declared that there must have been some tre¬ 
mendous imposition. Either the whole school consist- 


of Design in the Creation. 173 

ed of Smiths, or they called themselves Smiths, 
or they had picked out the Smiths. The four 
remaining boys, still expecting their cakes, here 
burst out laughing. 'What are your names?’ 
shouted the donor. ‘Smith!’ ‘ Smith!!’ ‘Smith !!! 9 
1 Smith !!!! 9 were the astounding replies. The good man 
could stand this no longer. He sent for the schoolmas¬ 
ter and said 'I particularly requested that you would 
choose a boy drawn by lot from each of your seven class¬ 
es, but you have not done so. You have merely picked 
out my namesakes and sent them up for the cakes . 9 But 
the master replied, ‘No, I assure you, they have been 
honestly chosen by lot. Nine black beans and one white 
bean were placed in a bag; each class of ten then drew 
in succession, and in each class it happened that the boy 
named Smith drew the white bean.’ ‘But,’ said the 
visitor, ‘this is not credible. Only once in ten million 
times would all the seven Smiths have drawn the white 
beans if left solely to chance. And do you mean to tell 
me that what can happen only once out of ten million 
times did actually happen on this occasion—the only 
occasion in my life on which I have attempted such a 
thing? I don’t believe the drawing was made fairly by 
lot. There must have been some interference with the 
operation of chance. I insist on having the lots drawn 
again, under my own inspection.’ ‘Yes, yes,’ shouted 
all the other boys. But all the successful Smiths roared 
out, ‘No!’ They did not feel at all desirous of another 


174 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

trial. They knew enough of the theory of probabilities 
to be aware that they might wait till another ten million 
fortunate old boys came back to the school before they 
would have such luck again. The situation came to a 
dead-lock. The Captain protested that some fraud had 
been perpetrated, and in spite of their assurance he would 
not believe them. The seven Smiths declared they had 
won their cakes honestly, and they would not surrender 
them. The Captain was getting furious, the boys were on 
the point of rebellion, when the schoolmaster’s wife 
alarmed by the tumult, came on the scene. It was ex¬ 
plained to her, and then Captain Smith added that by 
mathematical probabilities it was almost inconceivable 
that the only seven Smiths in the school should have 
been chosen. The gracious lady replied that she knew 
nothing, and cared as little about the theory of probabi¬ 
lities, but she did care greatly that the school should not 
be thrown into tumult. ‘There is only one solution of 
this difficulty, ’ she added. ‘ It is that you forthwith pro¬ 
vide cakes, not only for the seven Smiths, but for every 
one of the boys in the school. ’ This resolute pronounce¬ 
ment was received with shouts of approval. The Cap¬ 
tain, with a somewhat rueful countenance acknowledged 
that it only remained for him to comply. He returned, 
shortly afterwards, to his gold-diggings in Australia, 
there to meditate during his leisure on this remarkable il¬ 
lustration of the theory of probabilities. ’ ’ 

The point which Sir Robert wishes to illustrate by 


of Design in the Creation. 175 

this parable is the improbability of such arrangements as 
we find in the planetary system having originated by 
chance. He gives the probability against their having 
thus occurred as 10,000,000 to 1. But in the case of the 
planets and the coincidence of their planes of movement, 
we find an obvious and efficient cause in the laws which 
governed planetary evolution, while on the other hand 
there wa*s no law or agency in force to regulate the 
quantity and properties of the materials which went to 
so constitute the atmosphere that it should be perfectly 
adapted to the requirments of plant and animal life. 

The throwing of dice furnishes another interesting and 
striking illustration of this principle. There being six 
faces to each die and these faces having from one to six 
spots on each, it follows that the chance of any particu¬ 
lar number being turned up is one in six for each die. 
And if we have two dies in the box, the chance for each 
die that it will turn up any given number is one in six. 
But the chances that both will turn up any particular 
number is only one in six multiplied by six or thirty-six 
and the chance that any two numbers, say six, will be 
thrown ten times in succession is very small—less than 
1 in 60,000,000. This amounts to almost absolute impos¬ 
sibility but it will readily occur to most thinkers that 
if mind be allowed to interfere and guide, even this very 
complicated combination changes from chance to a sim¬ 
ple certainty. 


176 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


§ 18. Intelligent Design. 

It is a well-established rule in science that when a 
so-called working hypothesis glaringly fails to account 
for well recognized phenomena and their obvious rela¬ 
tions, it must be dismissed because it has evidently been 
founded on erroneous conceptions and data. From the 
facts and principles which have been presented in the 
preceding pages, there is no escape from the conclusion 
that the “monistic mechanical theory” as its advocates 
delight to call it, which has been so earnestly exploited 
as a complete solution of the riddle of the universe, fails 
entirely to account for the most important physical ad¬ 
justments which obtain in the earth and its atmosphere, 
except by the agency of “blind chance.” Now, as we 
have seen, the adjustments have been made to the one 
five-millionth part of the whole, so that, taking existing 
conditions as the middle point, then on either side of this 
central line, there are five million chances against the 
right point being struck. In other words, there is only 
one chance in ten millions that the present order of 
things came into being otherwise than by the intelligent 
design of a supreme guiding Power, and this amounts 
to almost absolute impossibility. 


of Design in the Creation. 17; 

In order to make this clear even to those who are least 
familiar with such questions, let us take a very easily 
understood case which would be almost parallel to that 
of the atmosphere and its constitution, and which will 
serve to illustrate the principles therein involved. 

It is well known to botanists that the number of species 
of plants which may be found on a square yard of fer¬ 
tile ground is sometimes very large. Now, suppose that 
you have a prescription which calls for twenty-five in¬ 
gredients in varying amounts, they being all veget¬ 
able, and let us suppose further that you were to pitch 
by chance upon a square yard of ground and were to 
find there the twenty-five plants for which your prescrip¬ 
tion calls, and that you were to find them in the exact 
quantities required, neither more nor less: would not 
that be astounding if, indeed, it were not entitled to 
be called miraculous? 

Such a thing could never happen except by the guid¬ 
ance of high intelligence, backed by power such as no 
human being ever possessed. 

And yet even this falls short of the intelligent guid¬ 
ance and supreme power which were required to adjust 
the absolute quantity as well as the character and propor¬ 
tions of the various materials which went to form this 
earth and its atmosphere so that they might be adapted 
to the requirements of the higher animals and of man. 

Out of the 70 or 80 elements known to the chemist and 
which compose this earth, the quantities of at least twen- 


178 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

ty-five had to be carefully adjusted in order to leave 
an atmosphere such as we now have, and in this adjust¬ 
ment due regard had to be paid to the special character 
and combining weight of each individual element. This 
involved a complex combination of conditions which far 
exceeds those involved in the ingenious parable of Sir 
Robert S. Ball and to ask us to believe that these adapta¬ 
tions with all their minute details, were the result of 
mere chance, is to demand an amount of credulity com¬ 
pared with which an unfaltering belief in all the mir¬ 
acles said to have been wrought by all the saints would 
be a reasonable form of faith. 

We are therefore compelled to dismiss the hypothesis of 
monistic mechanical evolution determined by mere blind 
chance as utterly inadequate to explain the great rid¬ 
dle which this universe with all its varied manifestations 
of adaptation presents. On the other hand, that evolu¬ 
tion which is the expression of the will and power of a 
supreme, self-conscious, personal Ruler, furnishes a sim¬ 
ple and adequate explanation of all the wonderful ad¬ 
justments which we have described and no other hypo¬ 
thesis is competent to do this. 


of Design in the Creation. 


179 


§ 19. Conclusion. 

In the preceding pages I have endeavored to present a 
sound argument in favor of a rational belief in that 
fundamental fact upon which all true religion must ulti¬ 
mately rest—the existence of a self-conscious, personal 
God who guides and rules the universe. 

It is a generally acknowledged fact that there are many 
minds which on this subject yield to no arguments short 
of a strict mathematical demonstration, and that is some¬ 
thing which we never can have in this life. While here 
we must “walk by faith” to a very large extent in reli¬ 
gion as well as in the ordinary affairs of Life. As has 
been well said by Sir Robert S. Ball: “If we were to 
reject belief in everything which can not be proved either 
by the testimony of actual eye-witnesses or by strict 
mathematical deductions, it would, I fear, fare badly with 
not a few great departments of modern science.” 

But besides that craving for wliat may be called posi¬ 
tive assurance, a craving that can never be satisfied, 
there are two considerations which seem to have with 
many, an influence far greater than that which their 
real merit warrants and as they have both been strong¬ 
ly urged of late and appear prominent in the writings of 


180 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

most materialistic authors, I may be pardoned for devot¬ 
ing a few lines to them. 

The first is based on the supposed insignificance of 
this earth and of man as its chief inhabitant; the sec¬ 
ond and lower influence has its origin in a mere hatred 
of ecclesiasticism or priestcraft and this hatred is some¬ 
times carried to such an extreme that it leads those in¬ 
fected with it into the most absurd positions. 

It is the belief of the Christian that the supreme In¬ 
telligence, whom he worships as God, is a personal, self- 
conscious Being who has existed from all eternity and 
who rules and guides all things towards an end which is 
ultimately wise and beneficent; that, from the begin¬ 
ning, He has foreseen the outcome and result of all ex¬ 
isting conditions and of everything which comes to pass 
and that for His own good purpose He prepared this 
earth to be a habitation for man and made all things 
work together to that end; and that this doctrine fur¬ 
nishes a clear explanation of all the wonderful adjust¬ 
ments and adaptations which we find in the earth, the 
sea and the air. 

In order that this habitation might be prepared for 
man and man for his habitation and surroundings, the 
Creator and Ruler of the universe ordained certain forces 
and laws which under His guidance brought about by 
the process of evolution the condition of things as we 
know them. 


of Design in the Creation. 181 

On the part of the materialist a favorite objection to 
these articles of faith is that it would be absurd to sup¬ 
pose that the Being who created this universe and who 
is so great that he guides the starry hosts in their paths 
through space, could ever descend to such trifling de¬ 
tails as the care of a being like man on a planet which 
is not the one-millionth part of the size of any one of mil¬ 
lions of millions of suns, all probably with systems very 
much larger, more complicated and from a material point 
of view more beautiful and interesting than our earth 
and solar system and consequently in their eyes vastly 
more important than this little globe. They are fond 
of comparing man to an insect and a small one at that; 
a mere ephemeron whose brief life when compared with 
the duration of a star is immeasurably less than that of 
the flower which opens in the morning and withers ere 
noon. They consequently scout the idea that the cre¬ 
ator and governor of the universe would pay any at¬ 
tention to the doings or the needs of such insignificant 
creatures as men and women and they claim that such 
ideas could be held only in the early days of the race 
when men believed that the earth was the center of the 
universe and man the lord of creation for whose benefit 
all things were made and ordered. And since the geo¬ 
centric theory (as they are fond of stating it) has been 
replaced by our knowledge of the heliocentric character 
of the solar system, or, in plain language, since we have 
found that the earth moves round the sun and not the 


182 


The Atmosphere as a Proof 


sun round the earth, they claim that the earth, and man 
with it, have been degraded from their supposedly high 
position and are seen to be unworthy of the special re¬ 
gal’d of God—if there be a God. 

When this objection is carefully analyzed it will be 
seen that it is the objection itself that is absurd and not 
the doctrine at which it is aimed. The objection assumes 
the immensity if not the infinity of the Supreme Being, 
an infinity which extends to both His knowledge and His 
power. Space and time are no doubt infinite; at least 
the human mind cannot conceive of any limit to them, 
but that the stellar systems in the universe are limited 
both in number and in quantity of material, is the belief 
of all competent scientific men. We can number, weigh 
and measure the starry hosts and although their multi¬ 
tude and magnitude are far beyond the grasp of any 
mere human intellect, they are not beyond the reach of 
mathematical computation and are clearly not infinite. 
To an infinite intellect nothing finite can be very great 
and it is equally certain that nothing is very small. 
There may be degrees of magnitude and of importance; 
Newton may really be immensely greater than one of the 
lower forms of animal life but the extent to which the 
greatest human mind that ever lived excels the very low¬ 
est, is utterly insignificant when compared with the dis¬ 
tance which separates the intellect of a Newton or a 
Plato from that of the Infinite Intelligence. 

It is an obvious deduction from this that to assert that 


of Design in the Creation. 183 

the recognition of even the most minute animalcule in a 
finite system, is beyond the scope of infinite power and 
knowledge, is so evidently absurd that it scarcely allows 
of discussion. 

The truth is that we are entirely unequal to the task 
of forming a just estimate of the true relative importance 
of the different objects which we find in that part of the 
universe which we have been able to examine. Surely 
we cannot measure the degree of this importance by the 
mere bulk, multitude or even the material magnificence 
of the objects under observation. Sirius may be ten 
million times the size of the earth and yet the latter, as 
the habitation of intelligent beings, some of whom are 
striving to bring themselves into touch with the divine 
mind, may be to the Creator an object of far greater in¬ 
terest and regard than would be ten million white-hot- 
balls like Sirius and other stars which may be now in 
the same condition that our earth was millions of years 
ago and so are destitute of any reasoning creatures cap¬ 
able of understanding His works and of rendering to 
Him, not the slavish homage or servitude of “dumb 
driven cattle” or the mere physical obedience of dead 
matter, but that worship, appreciation and love which 
the highest class of minds have always rendered to the 
great Father of all. That it becomes us to be humble 
and to realize how far we are from a full comprehension 
and knowledge of His ways as displayed in the constitu¬ 
tion of the world around us is certainly highly commend- 


184 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

able but when we attempt to depreciate and belittle His 
work as it is exhibited in the constitution of our bodies 
and minds, we are guilty not only of deep ingratitude 
but of blasphemous insult to Him who gave us the power 
to share with Him in an intelligent contemplation of the 
universe around us. Rather let us, in the language of 
Kepler, which has been already quoted, * ‘ thank Him that 
we are able to think His thoughts after Him. ’ ’ 

Dr. Saleeby makes the extraordinary assertion that it 
is a “monstrous blasphemy” to claim that we are made 
in the image of God. Rigorous logic, based on unques¬ 
tionable facts, compels us to say rather that it would be 
not only a monstrous blasphemy but a scientific absurdity 
to deny it. 

That there are several causes besides rational convic¬ 
tion which lead men to embrace atheism, scepticism and 
the cruder forms of agnosticism, is well known to those 
who have paid attention to the subject. Any one who 
will carefully read the works of Haeckel, Tyndall, Hux¬ 
ley and men of that stamp cannot fail to see that their 
intense hatred of ecclesiasticism has swayed their logic, 
embittered their language and even led them to distort 
their facts when they came to write about anything re¬ 
lating to the religious faith taught in the churches. One 
of the most bitter attacks on Christianity from an his¬ 
torical point of view is History of the Conflict Between 
Religion and Science , by John William Draper, M. D. 
LrL. D., etc. etc. This work is so utterly illogical that it 


of Design in the Creation. 


185 


must have surprised those who had been accustomed to 
read the clear-headed analysis of facts and the cogent ar¬ 
guments of that scientist when he was dealing with purely 
scientific investigations but from the fact that the book 
was published as one of a series of popular scientific 
volumes, many of them by able and favorite authors, it 
has had a large circulation and has exerted an influence 
far beyond anything which could have been due to its 
intrinsic worth. 

Another writer who follows in the same path is the 
Hon. Andrew D. White, LL. D. etc. who was the first 
President of Cornell University and who has filled a 
number of political positions. He has written two pon¬ 
derous volumes which claim to give a history of The War¬ 
fare of Science with Theology in Christendom. Now 
Huxley, the leader of the agnostics and indeed the man 
who originated the term agnostic, tells us positively and 
truly that there can be no warfare between science and 
theology and when we come to examine the question 
carefully we will find that the warfare has always been 
between science and a corrupt ecclesiastieism, just as 
there has always been a warfare between politicians (us¬ 
ing that term in its present degraded signification) and 
everything that would make for human progress but 
which did not advance their own personal interests. Re¬ 
ferring to this very subject in his volume on Hume, Hux¬ 
ley, who certainly cannot be accused of a leaning towards 
Christianity, says: “That which it may be well for us 


186 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

not to forget is that the first recorded judicial murder 
of a scientific thinker was compassed and effected, not 
by a despot or by priests, but was brought about by elo¬ 
quent demagogues, (politicians) to whom of all men, 
thorough searchings of the intellect are most dangerous 
and therefore most hateful. 5 ’ 

Truth, whether it be religious or scientific, loses noth¬ 
ing by being opposed; in fact it gains rather than loses, 
for opposition compels its advocates to clear it of super¬ 
fluous and irrelevant matter and this tends to place it 
in a sharper and clearer light than it could otherwise 
have attained. 

It is no opprobrium to theology that avaricious pre¬ 
lates and bigoted priests have used their powers in un¬ 
just and cruel ways and have committed acts at which 
enlightened humanity, shudders. The acts of these men 
cannot be used as an argument against either religion or 
theology any more than the rascalities and mendacity 
of venal legislators can be quoted against a representa¬ 
tive form of government. Humanity has passed through 
terrible ordeals of which the fires of Moloch and the 
atrocities of the middle ages were frightful illustrations 
and that they were frequently perpetrated under the 
cover of a false theology is unquestionably true, but to 
attribute these horrible doings to theology as a science 
or to Christianity as a religion is not only illogical but 
absurd. As well might we attribute the frauds of the 
alchemists to chemistry or the swindles of Keely and 


of Design in the Creation. i 87 

other mechanical cheats to the science of mechanics as 
blame theology for the crimes perpetrated in its name. 
So that from a common sense point of view President 
White’s book is a colossal blunder of which his friends 
will, in future years, undoubtedly be heartily ashamed. 

As for the smaller fry, Ingersoll and others of that 
grade, the wonder is that men who evidently have never 
studied the common branches of science and who are 
ignorant not only of the first principles but of the most 
elementary facts of chemistry and physics, should risk 
making fools of themselves by attempting to deduce ar¬ 
guments from data of which they evidently know noth¬ 
ing. Ingersoll owed much of his power to his personality 
and to his wonderful oratorical abilities; these enabled 
him to draw large audiences who paid him well in cash 
but judging by the blunders which he made, and which I 
have elsewhere exposed, the man was actually unable to 
read understanding^ such comparatively popular scien¬ 
tific books as Tyndall’s ‘ ‘ Heat as a Mode of Motion. ’ ’ 

Another writer, Carl Snyder, gravely tells us in his 
New Conceptions in Science that the primal atoms, 4 ‘the 
so-called elements of the chemist, variously compounded, 
make up all earthly things, our bodies, brains and souls 
included. ’ ’ 

What his opinion is worth may be judged by the fact 
that he also tells us that “Archimedes’ discovery was 
that a body in water displaces a quantity of water of 
equal weight, and not according to its bulk, as one might 


188 The Atmosphere as a Proof 

believe at first thought!” The discovery of Archimedes 
was exactly the reverse of what Snyder states it to have 
been as every schoolboy that has studied natural philos¬ 
ophy knows. Mr. Snyder is evidently ignorant of the 
most rudimentary facts and principles of hydrostatics 
for this statement of his is evidently not a typographical 
error or a mere slip of the pen but a blunder which he 
has repeated and expanded. 

The reader may rest assured that it is not the men 
who stand highest in science who have adopted the 
views of the atheistic materialists. One of the very high¬ 
est, Lord Kelvin, tells us that “Science positively af¬ 
firms Creative Power. It is not in dead matter that we 
live and move and*have our being, but in the creating 
and directing Power which science compels us to accept 
as an article of belief. * * * If you think strongly 

enough you will be forced by science to the belief in 
God; which is the foundation of all religion. You will 
find science not antagonistic but helpful to religion/* 

I hope that in the preceding pages I have presented 
arguments which all can understand and which are lit¬ 
tle short of a mathematical demonstration of the exis¬ 
tence of a Supreme Being. These arguments are based 
upon simple facts and principles which may be found 
fully explained in any text book appropriate to the sub¬ 
ject and which are absolutely incontrovertible. 


INDEX 


Absolute Zero, 72. 

Accident, 163. 

Adaptation as evidence of pur¬ 
pose, 36. 
power of, 141. 

Adjustments, how made, 146. 
Affinity, cellular, 41. 

Agassiz, on man, 63. 

Air, composition of 74. 

effect of density on com¬ 
bustion, 134. 
effect of height on, 69. 
elasticity of, 68. 
weight of, 64. 

Airy on Perpetual Motion, 48. 
Ammonia, 98. 

Animal structure—Design in, 
37. 

Animals depend upon vegeta¬ 
bles, 95. 

Anthropomorphism, 24. 
Aqueous Vapor, 86. 

acts as a blanket, 89. 
agency of, 87. 

Archimedes’ discovery, 187. 

moving the earth, 142. 
Atmosphere, adaptation to life 
130. 

a mere mixture, 98. 
chemical effect of quanti¬ 
ty, 134. 

composition of, 74, 76. 
evolution of the, 116. 
height of, 71. 
mechanical effect of quan¬ 
tity, 133. 

Natural Philosophy of, 
primeval, extent of, 123. 
proportion of to solid mat¬ 
ter in globe, 144. 
the chief source of organ¬ 
ic matter, 76. 

Atheism, 33. 


Atoms, Loves of the, 41. 
Automatic mechanical adapta¬ 
tion, 149. 

Back parts of Almighty, 24. 
Ball, Sir. R. S., 62, 171, 179. 
Balloon ascents, 69. 

Bell, Sir Charles, on the Hand, 
38. 

Brain seci'eteS thought, 37. 
Bridgewater Treatises, 38. 
Burroughs, John, 26, 40. 
Caissons, dense air in, 134. 
Carbon-theory, 80. 

Carbonic acid, 90. 

best proportion, 124. 
breath of life to plants, 
93. 

fatal to animals, 91. 
very heavy, 90. 
sources of, 91. 

Carpenter on Evolution, 53. 
Cause and effect, 166. 
Chalmers, Thomas, 38. 

Chance, 156. 

Coins, tossing, 158, 170. 
Coincidence, 166. 

Combination, chemical, 101. 
Complex chance combinations, 
169. 

Comte, religion of, 20. 
Conclusion, 179. 

Creation by Law, 49. 

Croft on chance, 157. 

Daniels on gases, 73. 

Darwin, Charles, 17. 

Davy, Sir H., 26, 100. 

Deism, 33. 

De Morgan, Coincidences, 168. 
Design, intelligent, 176. 

shown by adaptation, 35. 
the keynote, 18. 



190 


INDEX. 


Determinism, 160, 

Dice, 175. 

Disbelief in God, reason for, 
26, 180. 

Dissociation of elements, 118. 
Draper, Dr. J. W., 184. 

Earth, very small, 181. 

weight of, 142. 

Element, what is an? 99. 
Elements, dissociation of, 118. 

number of the, 100. 
Evolution, 55. 

Bearing of upon Religious 
Belief, 16. 

Monistic mechanical, 178. 
not opposed to design,, 18. 
Existence, mode of personal, 
23. 

Explosion of oxygen and hy¬ 
drogen, 150. 

Face of God, never seen, 23. 
Fate, 161. 

Fiat, creation by, 49. 

Finite and infinite, 182. 

Fisher on Pantheism, 33. 
Fittest, survival of the, 68. 
Flamstead, coincidence, 168. 
Free will, 160. 

Gaseous vertebrate, 28. 

Gases, diffusion of, 106. 
experiments on, 108. 
kinetic theory, 73. 
Gateways or senses, 52. 
Geocentric theory, 181. 

God, personality of, 19. 

Gray, Asa, 17. 

Greyhounds in Mexico, 140. 
Gravitation, law of, 45. 

Haeckle, Prof. Ernest, on de¬ 
sign, 16. 

hatred of ecclesiasticism, 
17. 

law of substance, 48. 
religion of, 21. 

Heads and tails, 170. 
Heliocentric theory, 181. 


Helmholtz, 118. 

Herschel, Sir John, on atmos¬ 
phere, 72. 

on Theory of Probability, 
162. 

Hume on Miracles, 167. 
Huxley’s coincidence, 167. 
Hydrogen explodes with oxy¬ 
gen, 149. 

quantity in ocean, 127. 

Ingersoll, R. G., 187. 

Inorganic evolution, 148. 
Intelligent design, 176. 
Invisibility of God, 28. 

Iron burns in pure oxygen, 
138. 

Jevons, Prof. W. S., 46, 49. 

Kelvin on Creative Power, 188, 
Kepler, 31. 

Kinetic theory of gases?, 73. 

Laplace, 48, 152, 156. 

Lavoisier, 79. 

Law, creation by, 49. 
natural, 43. 
of substance, 44. 
reign of, 43. 

Lodge, Sir Oliver, 17, 61. 
Lucretius, 146. 

his invocation to Venus, 

22 . 

Man made in image of God, 
184. 

Martyr, first scientific, 185. 
Mechanical adaptation, auto¬ 
matic, 149. 

Microscopic writing, 27. 

Mill, John S., 41, 44, 46. 
Milton, 160. 

Mivart, "Genesis of Species.” 
18. 

Monistic mechanical evolution, 
37. 

inadequate, 178. 
Monkeys, man not descended 
from, 61. 


INDEX. 


I 9 I 


Mosquito jar, 150. 

Mountain sickness, 69. 

Murder of scientific thinker, 
185. 

Natural Law, 43. 

Newton, 48. 

Nitric acid, 98. 

Nitrogen, properties, 78. 

amount of in globe, 136. 

Owen, Sir Richard, 17. 

Oxygen, bleaching power of, 
94. 

effect of diminished pro¬ 
portion, 138. 

effect of pure oxygen on 
combustion, 85, 137. 
forms one-half the globe, 
83. 

no fires without, 139. 
properties of, 81. 
pure, experiments with, 
137. 

Ozone, 96. 

Paley’s illustrations, 37. 

Pantheism, 33. 

Plants on square yard, 177. 

Probability, theory of. 161. 

Quantity of matter in earth, 
fixed in the begin¬ 
ning, 155. 

Rain-drops on Rocky Moun¬ 
tains, 160. 

Rain falling in ocean not 
lost, 88. 

Reign of law, 43. 

Richelieu, Play of, 22. 

Riddle of the Universe, 16, 41, 
44, 80. 

Rocky Mountains, rain fall¬ 
ing on, 159. 


Sale, Sir Robert, 167. 

Saleby, Dr., 184. 

School—drawing lots#, 171. 
Scott, Sir Walter, 164. 

Senses, the, as gateways, 52. 

nature of, 42. 

Seth, Prof., on Paley, 39. 
Sexual cell-love, 41. 

Sifting of the atmosphere, 125. 
Snyder, Carl, 187. 

Space, temperature of, 72. 
Stars not infinite, 182. 
Substance, law of, 44. 

Sunday School scholars, 24. 

Temperature at which life is 
possible, 131. 
of early period, 118. 
of space, 72. 

Theism, 33. 

Thiers on religion, 22. 

Theology and science, 185. 
Thought a “secretion,” 37. 
Tossing coins, 158. 

True, the, the Beautiful and 
the good, 21. 

Vertebrate, gaseous, 28. 
Vocal command, no, 30. 

Wallace, Alfred R., 127, 140. 
Water, boiling, effect of pres¬ 
sure of air on, 70. 
expanding as it cools, 153. 
Waverly Novels, 164. 

Weight of globe, 143. 

Whewell on Evolution, 53. 
White, Dr. A. D., 185. 

Wilson, Prof. G., 79. 

Woman, adoration of, 21. 
Writing, minute, 27. 

Young, Dr. Thomas., 71, 121. 

Zero, absolute, 72. 




























* 








































































. 






















